On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 03:43:10PM -0600, wayne wrote:
| > What if we want to go beyond that capability? For example:
| >
| > * MTA Mark like description of IP address use
| > * Accreditation schemes
| > * Domain key type authentication
|
| I personally don't want to see *any* of those put into SPF.
| Absolutely not.
|
| SPF is a good tool that does one thing well: It validates the
| envelope from.
|
| If you want MTA Mark, then use MTA Mark. It complements SPF well,
| although I personally think that port 25 filtering is a far better
| approach to the problem than MTA Mark.
|
| If you want accreditation schemes, or Domain Key type validations of
| email, then use something else.
|
| SPF is not the FUSSP.
|
But it's nice to have SPF be the Sender Policy Framework --- a framework
that lets you do IP-based authentication declarations, but also lets you
make DomainKeys announcements. I mean, it's already there, you know?
meng
-------
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-02.9.4.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?¡