spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [spf-discuss] Bounce-Spam and SPF-Ignorant ISPs - it is time to retaliate?

2005-11-29 05:38:01
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

paddy wrote:
Suppose I am offered mail for usera(_at_)example(_dot_)org and 
userb(_at_)example(_dot_)org
Say, for example, usera wishes to receive .exe attachments, but userb
must not.  Is there a scheme something along the lines of tempfail
after data, remember the transaction, tempfail the second user
at rcpt time next time around, to cause the mail to split.
(if that works then presumably you could simply always force seperate
delivery to users with different content filtering settings, but that
may be undesirable) Is this what lmtp is intended to address?

I don't know about LMTP, but Sam Varshavchik, the author of Courier MTA, 
has proposed (and implemented in Courier) an SMTP extension that allows 
separate responses to DATA for each recipient:

  http://www.courier-mta.org/draft-varshavchik-exdata-smtpext.txt

It seems reasonable but unfortunately isn't implemented widely.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDjEuDwL7PKlBZWjsRAvCZAJ9AVFDBIeGeQmA5xpB853SietUcXQCgsbv5
ExpSNss/cFdJVIVcFnvDAtI=
=boYd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
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

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