begin Thursday 22 January 2004 17:32, Marc Alaia quote:
2) The major argument for processing SPF at SMTP time has been bandwith and
processing savings, which I believe are MINIMAL for non-ISP's.
There is another major argument: joe-job prevention. If you first
accept the message, and reject it only after it has been queued
locally you can either:
1. Silently discard it. Bad idea in case of a false positive: the
sender is not made aware that his message has not been delivered.
2. Bounce it. However, as it is already on your system, you have to
connect back to the "sender's" MX to deliver the bounce. However, if
the sender is fake, this is obviously a rather bad idea.
Rejecting at SMTP time doesn't have this "bounce" issue, as the
message is refused right away. Note: this does still work (in some
way...), even if the message is refused after DATA.
Regards,
Alain
-------
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?¡