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