From: Alex van den Bogaerdt (alexergens.op.het.net)
Date: Mon Jan 12 2004 - 10:04:38 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 10:46:32AM -0500, Victor.Duchovnimorganstanley.com wrote:

> There is *nothing* wrong with SMTP that SPF can fix, because SMTP is a
> simple implementation of a *process* with real requirements. The *process*
> of sending email involves:
>
> - submission
> - forwarding
> - delivery or error notification
>
> Anything that does not do the above is not email. The SPF proposal is in
> conflict with the fundamental requirements of email because it prevents
> forwarding. End of story, goodbye SPF, nice mental exercise. SRS is dead
> in the water and no replacement is going to prove viable. Lets focus on
> content policy, not having an authentic origin is not the problem.

I'm with you on the SRS opinion. However, I welcome SPF.

What is wrong with taking the letter out of the envelope, putting it
in another envelope and forward it using _your_own_ envelope?
This, or alternatively, putting the entire package including the
original envelope in another envelope.

If I send mail to Victor.Duchovnimorganstanley.com I do not expect nor
do I want a bounce from whateverotherlacotion.tld You forward it, you
deal with the problems.
I did not write "lacotion" in stead of "location". I cannot fix the
problem.

Alex

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]