spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: SPF and current sender-id drafts

2004-08-21 07:34:22
At 2:28 PM on Saturday, August 21, 2004  "John Glube"said:
<snip>
I can't speak for Chris Haynes. However, if MS were to come
forward with a good faith BCP which meets the concerns
raised, it would be logical for Chris to withdraw his
objection.
</snip>


What would make me happy, nay ecstatic, would be a collection of drafts which:

1) Gave protection against joe-job backscatter - so I can stop the 40+
virus-carriers per day which I presently receive,

2) Applied Occam's Razor to avoid the need for two records (explained below),

3) Permitted receiving MTAs to select and declare (to their users) whether they
apply the 'SPF-like' Mail-From tests, the PRA tests or both,

4) Released those opting out of the PRA tests from the requirement to accept any
Microsoft PRA-related licence.



On the two-records point, I think it just dawning on many people (myself
included) what Meng (I think it was) pointed out.

You can / should leave the record as defining an algorithm which says whether a
particular IP 'matches' a set of criteria, regardless of the context in which
that matching takes place.

If (as many seem to believe) most people can have a single domain record for
both Sender_ID and 'SPF' tests - then that is the domain in which they place the
single record to be used for both their Mail-From and their PRA tests.

If it needs to be different for the two tests, you use a second domain. Example:

Mail-From: <someone(_at_)bounces(_dot_)acme(_dot_)example>
From: <sameperson(_at_)acme(_dot_)example>

She puts the record to be used for the Sender-ID in the acme.example domain, and
her SPF record in the bounces.acme.example domain (alongside an appropriate MX
record).

Occam's Razor?  Never proliferate constructs when a single one can be made to
serve the same purpose.

If Microsoft could find it in its heart / business-logic to move in these small,
non-threatening ways towards this IETF-sponsored Unification I think we would
have a really powerful joining of market forces to everyone's benefit - and I
would support it enthusiastically!

Chris Haynes



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>