Roger B.A. Klorese wrote:
Terry Fielder wrote:
SPF does not "introduce a new problem" it "exposes an existing
problem" because forwarders are re-addressing the email they forward.
(Note the difference between FORWARD and RELAY).
That's not a problem. Forwarders don't re-address email; they never
have..
Good ones do. Like mine.
That's like saying cows are a problem because they don't eat
with a knife and fork.
That's not a good analogy, cows are not capable of eating with utencils.
Forwarders are capable of re-addressing if they so choose.
If you want to amend Internet process and eliminate forwarding,
replacing it with incremental delivery or some such, fine.
I just want emails bouncing around not to be able to claim they are from
my domain if they are not from my domain aka forged.
But don't
call a long-standing function operating the way it always has operated a
problem.
There are lots of "long standing functions" in windows operating systems
that admins know they have to disable or they will get hacked/virused.
That doesn't make the "long standing functions" something that should
*ever* have been there. And that *is* a good analogy.
Terry
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Read the whitepaper! http://spf.pobox.com/whitepaper.pdf
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription, please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
--
Terry Fielder
terry(_at_)greatgulfhomes(_dot_)com
Associate Director Software Development and Deployment
Great Gulf Homes / Ashton Woods Homes
Fax: (416) 441-9085