Dick St.Peters wrote:
Wrong! Whatever you think of 1123 5.3.6(a), it simply documented what
was already nearly-universal practice.
Before 1123 the principle of operation was to add forwarding hosts to
the reverse path. It wasn't possible to modify the RCPT TO without also
modifying the MAIL FROM (adding an @forwarder.example to the reverse
path)
RFC 1123 removed the source routes for various (mostly good) reasons.
That implicity also killed the reverse paths (minus the special case
empty reverse path for error reports). Without the reverse paths the
forwarders were not more responsible to know what they're doing - the
error reports would go "directly" to the alleged originator. With that
we eventually got forged return paths and open relays and spam spam
spam.
Conventional postal service, which is the model for SMTP
NAK, there are essential differences. The source routes business was
related to similar UUCP constructs.
Frank
-------
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/?list_id=735