-----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 David
MacQuigg
Sent: maandag 23 mei 2005 18:48
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] Email ID Declaration - Summary of
Objections
At 12:28 PM 5/23/2005 -0400, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
Good luck with your mission to introduce another identity to the SMTP
protocol. Since SPF is about authenticating the existing MAIL FROM
identity (despite its drawbacks), hopefully discussions of the new
ID identity will move to an appropriate list.
You must not have read the summary in the 7 minutes since I
posted.
I, too, wish you good luck with your mission to introduce another identity
to the SMTP protocol; because a new SMTP verb "ID" would most certainly be
an SMTP service extension -- despite your odd protestations.
This is not a new identity, just a way to declare an existing
identity. It is no more a new identity than SUBMITTER or SRS.
SUBMITTER, assuredly, is a new identity:
C: MAIL FROM:<somuser(_at_)example(_dot_)com>
SUBMITTER=<whoever(_at_)forwarder(_dot_)com>
S: 250 Ok
Would you rather use SUBMITTER or the proposed ID?
SUBMITTER, at least, serves some useful purpose. Your ID, otoh, is no more
than a glorified extra HELO; and who needs that?
- Mark
System Administrator Asarian-host.org
---
"If you were supposed to understand it,
we wouldn't call it code." - FedEx