On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 05:39:01PM -0400, Jeff Macdonald wrote:
So how do we convince the MARID to use exisiting SPF records as is?
Sender-ID only requires a handful of existing tools to change to be able
handle verification while the new drafts requires thousands of adopters
to change their DNS records.
I should expand on the tools comment. Current tools use the envelope.
Current publishers use the envelope. That's SPF. If someone wanted to be
just Sender-ID compliant, he uses the From header. He publishes that. If
headers and envelope are the same, then he is SPF and Sender-ID
compliant. If they are different, then he's just Sender-ID compliant.
SPF tools would not find a DNS record at all. No harm, no foul.
Anyhow, I don't like what I see in the current drafts.
You assume thousands of adoptors want to have their messages validated
by Sender-ID. I, for one, do not want this. SPF solves a problem for me:
it prevents people from using my domains in the envelope MAIL FROM, and
thus reduces the 'backscatter' problem of joe-jobbing.
Sender-ID, while nice in itself since it protects the headers that
ultimately might end up on the users plate, does not solve this problem.
In fact, it makes it worse by sending bounces to the MAIL FROM address
which is probably forged. What's more: it uses an algorithm which to say
the least is a bit suspect in terms of licensing issues.
In short, if Sender-ID is going to use my published SPF1 records for
something i did _not_ publish them for, they are abusing my records.
They were not meant for Sender-ID, and I don't want them to be used for
Sender-ID.
Koen
--
K.F.J. Martens, Sonologic, http://www.sonologic.nl/
Networking, embedded systems, unix expertise, artificial intelligence.
Public PGP key: http://www.metro.cx/pubkey-gmc.asc
Wondering about the funny attachment your mail program
can't read? Visit http://www.openpgp.org/