----- Original Message -----
From: <terry(_at_)ashtonwoodshomes(_dot_)com>
To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 8:45 PM
Subject: RE: [spf-discuss] Re: RFC 2821 and responsibility for forwarding
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
[mailto:owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com]On Behalf Of
jpinkerton
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 1:58 PM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] Re: RFC 2821 and responsibility for
forwarding
----- Original Message -----
From: <terry(_at_)ashtonwoodshomes(_dot_)com>
To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 6:57 PM
Subject: RE: [spf-discuss] Re: RFC 2821 and responsibility
for forwarding
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
[mailto:owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com]On Behalf Of
jpinkerton
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 12:37 PM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] Re: RFC 2821 and responsibility for
forwarding
This might be a fix for mail-lists and forwarding which will
require the
MTA's to do nothing at all, but will have a higher overhead,
so is not a
long-term solution. My intention here is to create a "fix"
<snip>
As I see it, people *want* to have a solution, and will
tolerate such things
until someone gets around to sorting out how mail-lists and forwarders
should operate, and then gets them all to comply. Spf on
it's own will work
in all situations eventually, but it's going to be a gradual
process, as any
innovation always is. In the meantime, we need some "fixes"
for situations
that exist in the real world.
Valid point.
You stated:
require the MTA's to do nothing at all
I am not sure how that is possibly, because even forwarders ARE the
"MTA"'s in question.
Well - they can continue to do what they do now. i meant that they don't
have to change how they operate at present. The string of Received: headers
will appear in the mail and can be used by the final destination's RPF
milters.
I look forward to feedback from the implementors in the trenches who have
more insight into this.
But I do think the concept is good, hopefully it is workable (perhaps more
workable then SES?
Certainly looks more workable then SRS, because SRS has some real problems
I think :)
I *really* don't want to compete with any other technology, I am merely
trying to use the existing circumstances to produce the best result
possible, as quickly as possible, and with minumum disruption to the
existing workings of e-mail.
As I said - when some other and better fix shows up - this one's dead :-)
Slainte,
JohnP.
johnp(_at_)idimo(_dot_)com
ICQ 313355492