And we don't know, when the message arrives, whether it uses Sender-ID,
SPF, or some other method.
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
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
it's solving a significant problem.
dcrocker a t ...
WE'VE MOVED to: www.bbiw.net