Thursday, May 27, 2004, 11:25:41 PM, you wrote:
lkd> Zitat von David Brodbeck <gull(_at_)gull(_dot_)us>:
And greylisting can be a problem as well. There are some broken mail
systems (sending legitimate mail) which treat the greylister's
"temporary failure, please try later" as a delivery acceptance and
never resend. Nor do they (or the particular one I have encountered)
give a non-delivery report to the sender.
I would guess that the people who object to CBV will also object to
greylisting. It's yet another form of cost-shifting -- you're forcing the
sending server to keep the message on its queue longer and make more
attempts to try to send it.
lkd> With greylisting the cost remain between the two parties involved in the
mail
lkd> transaction (sendr/recipient). With CBV some third, maybe not at all
related
lkd> part have to "pay" too for the transaction.
lkd> That is a great difference if you think of a virus attack with forged
sender
lkd> addresses.
Realllllly bad example - I'm thinking of a virus attack right now...
and where are all the bounced viruses going ?
lkd> Regards
lkd> Andreas
lkd> -------
lkd> Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
lkd> Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
lkd> Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/spf-draft-200405.txt
lkd> Wiki: http://spfwiki.infinitepenguins.net/pmwiki.php/SenderPermittedFrom/
lkd> To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
lkd> please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com