[mailto:owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com] On Behalf Of David
Woodhouse
I disagree with this. Forwarding of mail is no more 'forgery
and abuse'
than routing of IP packets is forgery, or delivering of snail
mail with
its original return address is forgery when it actually came via the
local post office. That's just the way the world works.
Sticking to the snail mail analogy IMO only shows that you don't understand
the problem correctly.
If I send snail mail to you, the recipient is what I write on the package.
If the post office redirect it they stick a label on it saying so. The
recipient is no longer the original address. Do you really send snail mail
to your local post office:
To: David
c/o local post office
And ask them to forward it on to you! The first deliver stage doesn't finish
until it reaches the stated address, the post office and all its offices is
just an MX relay. Your actual address is the critical part.
If I send a message to david(_at_)whatever and, when it reaches
david(_at_)whatever,
its forwarded to david(_at_)anywhere the recipient is no longer the same. It
arrived at its destination (david(_at_)whatever) and YOU david(_at_)whatever
chose to
send it to a new address (david(_at_)anywhere). I did not send it to
david(_at_)anywhere and any delivery problems between david(_at_)whatever and
david(_at_)anywhere are yours and not mine. Mail that goes from
david(_at_)whatever to
david(_at_)anywhere should be identified in its envelope as just that and I
should not be responsible for authenticating that I can send from your first
address to your second.
Regards
Richard Bang
Floosietek Ltd
richard(_at_)ftgate(_dot_)com
http://www.floosietek.com