spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

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

2005-11-29 06:38:23
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 07:38:12AM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On 11/29/2005 07:16, paddy wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 11:53:25AM +0000, Julian Mehnle wrote:
<snip>
Only if the remote MTA cannot be reached should the
message be accepted and stored for later delivery.

yes, a key reason why its hard to see why bounces should go away entirely.

Yes, but very much a corner case at most.  Border MTAs should have all the 
information necessary to determine if a message is acceptable to deliver 
(e.g. list of valid users).  The only time this might be appropriate is in 
the case of multi-hop e-mail accross administrative boundries.

Actually now I look at it again a proxy can just pass a 4xx back.
Even a simple call-out could do so.  

I suppose that's no use in the genuine store and forward scenarios like
client connects twice a day for fifteen minutes.  But, as you say,
having a list of valid/invalid users is an option there.

A better example of how protocols and proxies can interact badly might be 
ftp, nat and ssl, perhaps.

Regards,
Paddy
-- 
Perl 6 will give you the big knob. -- Larry Wall

-------
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>