Michael Deutschmann wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jan 2007, Jeremy Harris wrote:
Perhaps it's time for forwarding to move away from being done
store-and-forward, towards being done synchronously?
You mean the stunt of having an MTA begin the outgoing mail transaction
while the incoming mail transaction is still in progress, so that the
forwarder doesn't acknowledge the sender's DATA until the recipient
acknowledges the forwarder's?
Yes.
Aside from the brittleness of such a scheme (it breaks if the sender MTA
has short timeouts and the recipient is sluggish, even if both are within
RFC limits),
That's up to an eager sender. Not your fault, as a forwarder - and
no different to if you were a final destination.
it only saves you from backscatter if you *don't* use SRS.
I'm not speaking to that point.
Under SRS, if the recipient backscatters, the bounce goes to the
SRS-transformed address, and then the forwarder has to relay it. As far
as his IP reputation goes, it will be just as if he was the backscatter
emitter.
Irrelevant. I don't care about the recipient backscattering. I care
about him rejecting. By working synchronously you can avoid, as
a forwarder, being a backscatter source yourself when a next-hop
(final, in this case) rejects.
- Jeremy Harris
-------
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