----- Original Message -----
From: "wayne" <wayne(_at_)midwestcs(_dot_)com>
To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 7:17 PM
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] SRS/SES mailing lists?
In <1100022391(_dot_)4043(_dot_)15(_dot_)camel(_at_)tuxpaq> Paul Iadonisi
<pri(_dot_)spf1(_at_)iadonisi(_dot_)to>
writes:
My basic question is, though I understand the principle difference
between SRS and SES (SRS rewrites MAIL FROM for forwarded mail where SES
rewrites MAIL FROM for all outgoing mail), does SES solve, or attempt to
solve the same forwarding problem that SRS does? Because if it does,
I'm wondering why time is being spent on SRS when SES provides the
additional protection of preventing false bounces even when implemented
unilaterally.
SES lets domain owners, independant of anyone else doing anything,
from having forwarded email fail SPF checks. (If you use the exists:
SES mechanism.)
SRS lets forwarders, independant of anyone else doing anything, from
having forwarded email fail SPF checks.
These are two slightly different problems and it is reasonable to have
two slightly different solutions. I have long advocated using both.
Ermm - - okay - can you try that again for my benefit please. The english
didn't quite parse in my head :-/
"SES lets domain owners,..." do what? ............et seq.
Slainte,
JohnP.
johnp(_at_)idimo(_dot_)com
ICQ 313355492