From: "Ralf Doeblitz" <list+spf-discuss(_at_)doeblitz(_dot_)net>
Hector, Sender-ID needs 822 headers to work.
Right, so legitimate mail is going to be lost for no logical, technical
reason.
Is violation of RFC822 no technical reason?
The mail is not valid if it does not contain at least one
originator and receiver field each.
Ralf,
First, RFC822 mandates::
Date:
From:
To: | cc:
Second, this was relaxed with RFC 2822, the current standard, by removing
the To: requirement:
Date:
From:
Third, a proposal is currently out recommending to remove the From:
requiirement!!!! I doubt that will happen. But its out there by one of the
most vocal IETF participants (Bruce Lilly).
Forth, this may violate US EPCA user expectation legal provisions. Not sure
if it matters to you. But it does to me. I will refrain of the details here
but to say Microsoft is now a big $$$ target where censorship claims can be
made. A small sysop may not see a lawsuit because he can't operate his
server correctly, but the Microsofts will.
Fifth, who said the email creation world started with GUI or Offline Mail
Reader/Writer? RFC x822 applies to SMTP too. Not just your off line
reader.
The mail world started as an online system with teletypes and dumb
terminals.
A SMTP server has long served as a terminal device and the server always
checked for the basic x822 requirements and need be, create the
fundamental x822 headers that were provided at SMTP 821.MAIL FROM and/or
821.RCPT TO.
Thus the SMTP server supported x821 and x822 as well to make sure the input
device (human hands, automated software, etc) met the x822 requirements.
It would add:
Date: <--- time of session
Message-ID: <-- brand new for MSA
From: <--- from x821.MAIL FROM
To: <--- from x821.RCP TO
Every, if not all, servers behaves this way. I don't of one that does not,
except now.
Consider this, Why would you break the old idea that the From: can be the
821.MAILFROM and accept this as the PRA? Why would it be resistence to
this?
There is none.
So far, early analysis of my PRA research is showing 88% of all transactions
have PRA = MAIL FROM anyway, as it should be most of the time.
There is simply NO reason to reject the mail because it doesn't have an
header. (Never mind accept and throw away - anti US EPCA).
You got the information you need for the PRA when no header is entered - it
must be the MAIL FROM by decades old standards.
It doens't make sense
BTW, your SendMail server accepted a no header input.
220 mx1.asco.de ESMTP Sendmail 8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3;
Fri, 24 Jun 2005 13:31:29.....
helo hdev1
250 mx1.asco.de Hello adsl-10-60-163.mia.bellsouth.net [65.10.60.163],
pleased to meet you
mail from: <spf-discuss(_at_)winserver(_dot_)com>
250 2.1.0 <spf-discuss(_at_)winserver(_dot_)com>... Sender ok
rcpt to: <list+spf-discuss(_at_)doeblitz(_dot_)net>
250 2.1.5 <list+spf-discuss(_at_)doeblitz(_dot_)net>... Recipient ok
data
354 Enter mail, end with "." on a line by itself
Look, no header!
.
250 2.0.0 j5OBVTb3016692 Message accepted for delivery
quit
221 2.0.0 mx1.asco.de closing connection
It would nice to know what headers it added or will behave like Hotmail and
the SendMail accept and junk too? Is this system supporting PRA?
.--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com