On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Ted Lemon <mellon(_at_)fugue(_dot_)com> wrote:
Tuesday, Dec 1, 2015 6:52 PM Al Iverson wrote:
Is that a hobbyist configuration? Is it relevant? It sounds a bit like
a cat and the hat both sharing a NAT. But in a very common high volume
production email scenario used by email service providers, clients and
types of mail are segregated by sending IP address.
My answer applies to both the gmail scenario and the private server scenario.
In both cases, putting my IP address in the Received header field means
that my legitimate mail is more likely to be dropped as spam, not less likely.
Noted that you don't. Just adding my voice: I do want it.
Correction: by "I do not want it," I mean "it do not want my mail legitimate
getting dropped as spam," not "On a personal level, I don't like it."
1. Received headers and the IP addresses therein are currently
valuable for filtering today, for me, for others, and as I've observed
for others as big as AOL.
2. When I say "I do want it," I mean I think it would be a great loss
to lose the current information (IP address and/or received headers)
valuable for filtering purposes today under existing use cases. I want
received headers and IP address source information to remain in email
3. Your concern about your sending reputation being commingled with
your cats is already the way the world works today if your mail
streams are commingled. This is not a new problem and the proposed
potential solution of redacting IP addresses or removing received
headers takes data way instead of adding more data for filtering
purposes. It's sort of cutting off a leg because we don't like how the
arm works. Too much of spam filtering and reputation today is still IP
address-based to throw out that identifier today. Like Chris said, the
machine learning out there now almost always uses that identifier as
an input today.
Al Iverson - Minneapolis - (312) 275-0130
Simple DNS Tools since 2008: xnnd.com
www.spamresource.com & aliverson.com
ietf-smtp mailing list