[Top] [All Lists]

Re: my Last Call comments on draft-hutzler-spamops-04

2005-06-15 21:00:00

[excerpts from my private reply to Frank's message]

anonymous mail is valuable in corner cases

Yes.  Somebody will take the technical "sender" responsibility.

the ability to send mail through an MSA not related to the
sender's From address

Anon servers as special type of MSA ?  It's an idea,  I don't
see where that's a problem in draft-hutzler-spamops.

I don't think it's good to require a special-type of MSA for anonymous mail.

I probably should be casting this in terms of "MSA should not disclose originator's authenticated identity for a variety of reasons" rather than "MSA should permit originator to send anonymous mail". Anonymous mail is only one reason that the MSA should not disclose originator's identity.

operators of MSAs SHOULD NOT restrict authorized submitters
to using particular From addresses, Sender addresses, and/or
MAIL FROM addresses.

Quite the contrary.  That's exactly what they SHOULD do, if
they are no anon servers.

strongly disagree.  that makes the MSA very dysfunctional.

we need to stop pretending that there's a relationship between From address and the MSA used by the originator - or that the originator's authenticated identity is even usable as a From or Sender address. that works in corner cases, but not in general, and it forces MUAs to be more complex than they need to be, it prevents users from setting From to other addresses even when (per RFC 822) this is clearly useful.

It's already an option in RfC 2476
and RfC 2476bis (6.1) for MAIL FROM, and another option for
the 822-Sender in (8.1).

sounds like something that needs to be clarified/fixed in 2476bis.


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