Roger B.A. Klorese wrote:
Terry Fielder wrote:
If the source or contributing factor of your depression (SPAM) is your
pre-existing condition of erectile dysfunction (Forwarding)...
Broken analogy. Forwarding is a need and a desire. Erectile
disfunction is not.
Clearly analogies are not working for either of us.
then your medecine (SPF) is treating the symptom of depression (SPAM)
without addressing at least one of the underlying causes of the
disease (Forwarding).
Forwarding is neither a disease nor its cause.
Forwarding without re-addressing is a side effect of a disease where the
disease is "allowing forgery".
Blocking forwarding is a
broken attempt to solve a problem.
SPF does *not* block forwarding, SPF blocks *forgery*. And if a
forwarder is doing forgery style re-injection (no re-addressing) then
that forwarder can only function *because* forgery is allowed.
The ability to forward with/without re-addressing to me is
re-injection. That is where our opinions differ.
And to most, re-injection requires the "forwarder" to take
responsibility.
And to you I suspect forwarding is not re-injection.
But when MTA X gives the message to the target X intended Y, when Y
passes msg onto Z it really should be Y (not X) that is responsible
for the message getting to Z. Hence to me why it is re-injection
whether or not there is re-addressing.
Y is not the intended target.
It most certainly IS for the sender X. If Y was not the target WRT X
then X would have sent the email directly to Z.
The end-consumer of the information is
the intended target. Y is just an address that is known to move the
mail to *or* *closer* *to* the intended target. When I say "send mail
to me to x(_at_)foo(_dot_)com" I am not saying that when mail reaches x(_at_)foo(_dot_)com it
reaches me. I am saying that mail sent to x(_at_)foo(_dot_)com will ultimately
reach me via a path that is none of your business. And as long as I
*as* *a* *user* have control over what happens to mail sent to
x(_at_)foo(_dot_)com, then that's all you or anyone have a right to know.
And that's the exact argument of those who believe forgery should be
allowed.
So we have an unresolvable difference of opinion I believe.
The market will decide.
And I'll bet forgery will die, one way or another.
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