On Tue, 14 Jul 2009, Scott Kitterman wrote:
I think that makes sense. What's not clear to me is why anything needs to
be changed in the standard to accomodate [best guess]?
It doesn't. That was a response to the general objection to best guess.
The proposed HELO mechanism isn't absolutely necessary - it could
be replaced by A mechanisms listing multiple IPs, and IP4 net blocks.
When there are enough disconnected mail senders to make those impractical, the
ISP contracts are probably big enough to make PTR RRs reliable.
It is a "nice to have" way of listing MTAs by naming convention without
reliable access to maintaining PTR RRs.
It is *not* replaced by the attempts to use %{h} in various incarnations -
Those people don't "get" it yet.
--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.
-------------------------------------------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org
Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com