And we don't know, when the message arrives, whether it uses Sender-ID,
SPF, or some other method.
David,
1. Your proposal presumes that there is a single, universal reference to be
used, among protocols that have widely different semantics. There isn't.
2. Your proposal presumes that exactly one mechanism will be used. That's not
a
safe assumption.
3. Your proposal seeks to modify the SMTP protocol exchange state diagram.
That's rather a major change to the Internet infrastructure. It is something
that has been avoided throughout many, many changes since the creation of smtp.
4. Your proposal adds a round-trip cost to the SMTP session. That is something
that has been very, very forcefully avoided since the creation of SMTP. Please
review the nature of EHLO as a means of adding options to SMTP and note that it
does not add a round-trip.
5. As others have quite forcefully noted, your proposal does not make a case
for
it's solving a significant problem.
d/
---
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
+1.408.246.8253
dcrocker a t ...
WE'VE MOVED to: www.bbiw.net