SM wrote:
Do you mean that the draft should specify a new method for passing
the relaying IP address to the MUA?
That appears to be the claim; that even after the border does all of its
evaluations, the MUA or an internal MTA might wish to do further
evaluations based on the relaying SMTP server's IP address, so this
header field should provide that mechanism. However, the model this
draft presumes doesn't work that way; the border MTAs do as much
evaluation as they are enabled to do, and the inner filtering agents and
MUAs consume those results.
As an implementor, I feel there are obviously good technical reasons
people moved in this direction in their various deployments. And as the
draft's author, I think adding the above extends the model in a way
contrary to its premises, thus changing the scope and delaying the
advancement of the proposal. Moreover, the proposal is extensible, so
if this is really something the community ends up needing, it can be
added later.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html