Frank Ellermann writes:
Dick St.Peters wrote:
Forwarding with SRS is saying "Send bounces back here and
we'll forward them to the original sender." In essence it's
substituting a reverse source route for the perfectly-good
direct route back to the sender, undoing what 1123 did in
deprecating source routes.
Yes, the users with a FAIL-policy (like me) have compelling
reasons why they don't want 5.3.6(a). And your users have
reasons why they like it, and SRS is one way to placate both.
I don't view it as "placating", just good service and good net
citizenship. By forwarding with SRS I get mail to my users even if
they use an email account at an SPF-checking service/site, and if the
forwarded mail fails I get the bounces back to the sender. By
rejecting on SPF fail, I don't forward forged mail "from" people like
you, so I don't get bounces to forward "back" to you either.
OTOH, when I reject forged mail, the site trying to send/relay the
forged mail here may send a bounce "back" to you. This is probably
little better than having me forward a bounce to you would be, so your
"-all" may not help you as much as you'd like.
Ashamed? I don't think I've ever encountered anyone ashamed
of an email address. AOL users, in particular, are often
almost belligerant in their view that AOL is "better."
Maybe a cultural thing, AOL addresses in Usenet are rare.
I han't noticed - it's been nearly 20 years since I spent much time on
Usenet. My last few visits to Usenet left me with the impression that
most of it is completely overrun with spam.
--
Dick St.Peters, stpeters(_at_)NetHeaven(_dot_)com
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
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