spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: SPF+SRS vs. BATV

2005-07-05 17:10:52

On 6 jul 2005, at 01.49, David Woodhouse wrote:

No, the website FAQ massively downplays the problem. I'd even go so far
as to call it downright dishonest. It says "You'll have to switch from
forwarding... to remailing". But that's not really true. What it should
say is that you'll have to wait for the whole of the rest of the world
to make that switch. It's not about what _you_ do yourself when
forwarding.

While this is a problem in theory, is it really much of a problem in practice? Pardon my ignorance here, but who really needs forwarding? Perhaps I simply don't know what the term is used for? Is it only used to denote what happens when a message delivered to user a(_at_)d1(_dot_)com is forwarded to a(_at_)d2(_dot_)com? If that's the case, why not simply require that all users check multiple email accounts instead of using forwarding? Or perhaps that they use RPOP?

Also, is it that much of a problem if forwarding breaks - from a receiver pow.? What would happen is that we reject based on SPF fail, and that rejection is in line with the policy of the sender domain, so it's not something that we could or should try to handle otherwise, right?

The person setting up the forward made the mistake of thinking that he could pose as an authoritative sender for any domain in the world - and that's not something that should be allowed to take place, right?

Or perhaps there is a whole category of very important, and valid, types of forwarding services that I simply miss? Mailing lists have been mentioned in this context, but I subscribe to a number of mailing lists that pass SPF with flying colors, so it must be a solved problem.

j o a r




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>