In
<1120572057(_dot_)19467(_dot_)142(_dot_)camel(_at_)hades(_dot_)cambridge(_dot_)redhat(_dot_)com>
David Woodhouse <dwmw2(_at_)infradead(_dot_)org> writes:
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 09:53 -0400, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
Any recipient who rejects your mail because they forwarded it
somewhere else first is badly broken.
You still seem confused. The recipient didn't forward the mail. The
forwarder did. [...]
Any forwarding that is done with out the explicit concent of the
recipient is abusive.
But let's not pretend that the administrator of the final recipient's
domain was at all involved in the forwarding process.
The administrator of the final recipient can choose to whether to
support forwarded email or not. If the admin chooses to not support
forwarding, then the recipeient shouldn't foward to that destination.
If they choose to support forwarding, then they should take steps to
support forwarding.
It isn't just SPF that is causing problems for forwarders in todays
email environment. Anyone who forwards email and doesn't do very
strict anti-spam measures risks being blacklisted as a spam source.
Forwarding without rewriting the 2821.MAILFROM also causes problems
with bounces because the sender will receive a bounce from some place
that they never sent email to. It can also increase backscattter.
Besides skipping SPF checks on forwarded email, the final recipient's
domain needs to also skip spam filters/blacklisting, etc.
-wayne