I liked someone's previous suggestion that the forwarding mail server
should change the envelope address and NOT the from address.
AIUI, this is what Meng's SRS proprosal does.
My concern is with the situation where the sender and receiver are SPF
compliant, but the forwarder complies only with existing RFCs. You
have to accept that this situation is valid, and will frequently occur
at least in the early days of SPF adoption.
A transition strategy can't meaningfully say that valid mail will
bounce until _everyone_ adopts SPF and SRS... So it needs to address
the case of legacy forwarders in a way other than saying that the
receiver SHOULD bounce valid mail (which is essentially what the
current draft says, according to my reading).
I can try and suggest a suitable wording as to what I think the draft
should say instead, if it still isn't clear to people what I'm getting
at...
-roy
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡