[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Submission identifiers

2009-01-25 08:22:46

sm(_at_)resistor(_dot_)net writes:
At 09:45 24-01-2009, David MacQuigg wrote:
Nobody I know makes that assumption. A more reasonable assumption is that the Bad Guys won't be able to use the identity of a Good Guy who is honest and competent.

If we were to have such an identity, we would need a way to verify it.

IMO, we'd need only a way to check whether it is in a set of such identities (namely the set of guys we consider good).

But I don't care very much even about that. To my mind, requiring EHLO from clients is really just formalising a requirement which (_AFAICT_) most implementers think has been there since 2821 was published, or even a while before that, perhaps since MIME came into use.

Why it's good or why it's bad is IMO insignificant. 2821 has said "use ehlo and use an FQDN" for a long time and it doesn't seem to have been much of a problem.

If it turns out that we get some sort of advantage from requiring FQDNs, fine.


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