-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Frank Ellermann wrote:
explain why you think that domain owners cannot confidently
define their policies without knowing exactly how receivers
will relate HELO and MAIL FROM results.
Simple my.homepage.example or xyzzy.dnsalias.org domain owners use third
parties as smart hosts, or they have an MTA but don't know exactly where
to configure its HELO identity.
In the first case (a smart host) the HELO identities affecting their mail
are completely outside of their control.
This situation requires _tolerance_, not _clarification_.
The problem here isn't that when defining their policy the domain owner
didn't know about how receivers would relate HELO and MAIL FROM checks.
Instead the problem is that they didn't care about whether their outbound
MTAs were giving valid HELO identities or not.
Telling the domain owner how receivers "MAY" have related HELO and MAIL
FROM checks would not have helped him. Telling receivers not to perform
HELO checks would have helped him, but that's not what we want, is it?
The second case is more like RTFM. One of these manuals is schlitt-02pre
schlitt-02pre? I don't know what you're talking about. I can only guess
that you mean "draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01 as modified by recent
decisions".
BTW, Frank, most of the time it would be a lot easier to understand you
precisely if you used less sarcasm and more context in your messages.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFCl49gwL7PKlBZWjsRAj8KAKCV73tWMmxYAhhLOmHJB6c1kg1r8ACgnTSP
/YWYxUNKwrraC/j1GWe19zU=
=+NvF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----