On Sun, 6 Jan 2008, you wrote:
On Sat, 2008-01-05 at 15:56 -0800, Michael Deutschmann wrote:
You are complaining that if traditional forwarding is used, example.net's
SPF implementation, aghast at what it sees as an attempt by example.org to
steal example.com's karma, unfairly denies example.org a chance to
accumulate
karma of it's own.
No, I think you've missed the point somewhat -- that wasn't what I
object to at all.
If not the "forwarding problem", then what else did you mean by
"not-entirely-true assumptions about the way SMTP works in the real
world"?
If you are thinking of the roaming user who doesn't change his MAIL FROM
as he connects his laptop to different ISPs, that's precisely what
Softfail and Neutral are intended for. Softfail is for ISPs who deprecate
the practice in favor of SMTP-AUTH, yet aren't confident that all users
are on board. Neutral is for ISPs that make no pretense that this
practice will end.
---- Michael Deutschmann <michael(_at_)talamasca(_dot_)ocis(_dot_)net>
-------------------------------------------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=2183229&id_secret=82358081-d6a99d
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com