On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 10:03:45PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > * Joel Baker > | Last I checked, this was (unfortunately) not yet an RFC, but only a draft > | proposal. It happens to be one I really like the idea of, but I am aware > | of more or less 'nobody' implementing it, nor any significant support for > | it in the major SMTP servers (though I'd love to have someone point out > | anything I'm missing, on that front...)
Actually, It's worse. There is three[1] slightly diffrent proposals at the moment. There is work going on merging these proposals, so it definetly too early to adopt these proposals. The implementation in majos SMTP servers isn't that large problem, most mailers are modular enough these days to handle the problem with an external module. > I think it's a silly proposal, since it will hinder people like me who > are sending all their mail from a laptop to send their mail properly. And I think you didn't read the proposals and the discussion related to them at all. First hint: envelope from vs "^From: " Second hint: If you insist on your right to forge your email address, anyone else can forge your address as well. Is that a right you really need? Third hint: You can still choose to allow any IP send emails in your domains name. Just do not add the records in dns, and everything will stay as it is currently. The antipathy against the a POSSIBILITY of a domain owner to restrict sending mail in name of his own domain to few IP's is what is silly, not the proposal... > Of course, techies like we will find a way around it by tunnelling > mail through a ssh tunnel or the equivalent, but it'll suck for mobile > users in general. and most non-technical users will probably have one address and one SMPT AUTH based mail server to use. [1] http://spf.pobox.com/ http://www.danisch.de/work/security/antispam.html http://www.pan-am.ca/dmp/dmp-faq.html -- Riku Voipio | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | kirkkonummentie 33 | +358 40 8476974 --+-- 02140 Espoo | | dark> A bad analogy is like leaky screwdriver |
