[Top] [All Lists]

LMAP systems

2005-05-25 11:45:27

 Tony Finch <dot(_at_)dotat(_dot_)at> writes:

On Wed, 25 May 2005, Bruce Lilly wrote:

All apply (conflating sending/receiving, failure to account for SMTP
with mechanisms other than TCP, attempts to assign IP/domain relationship
for sending), and there was also "etc." which you conveniently failed to
quote, and that covers a slew of practical problems with EHLO/HELO.

You'll have to explain how CSV conflates sending and receiving, and why
tying an IP address to a hostname is a problem. Perhaps you think CSV has
something to do with mail domains? (It does not.)

I don't think Bruce really understands CSV.  For that matter, he
doesn't appear to really understand SPF, MTAMark, or SenderID either.

Frank was right.  SPF, CSV, and MTAMark all do different things.  The
closest two are the SPF HELO checking and CSV, but even those two have
different semantics for certain key issues.

What they all have in common is that they all allow people to have a
voice on some email-related issue, and they all allow email receivers
to listen.  All are option for publishing, and optional for checking.
None of them are final and ultimate solutions to the spam problem.

Personally, I don't think these proposals, along with IIM and DK,
compete as much as complement each other.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>