Re: What if EHLO/HELO check fails?

Hadmut Danisch wrote:
> 
...
> 
> Raymond, please, stop this "They'll do whatever they want, anyway"
> point of view. This is extremely counterproductive.

In your message that I was replying to, you said:

	Or do we not care at all and say: Just determine
	whether HELO and SENDER are ok or not and let the 
	MTA admin do with it whatever he wants?

Keep in mind that the "MTA admin" is the one that will need to implement
the active enforcement part of any of these proposals. And that the
"MTA admins" knows the particular needs and resource availability's of
their situations better than anyone here.

They will make the decision of what to do with the information provided
by these proposals for their environment. These proposals are about
providing the information, not what they MUST do with it.

> If we use this point of view, we can stop our work right now.

No, our work is to standardize a way to provide useful
forged/not-forged/unknown information to "MTA admins" so that they can
use it to implement LOCAL policy.

> At least for those who will not do whatever they want we'll have to
> describe a guideline, including headers, procedures etc. Everything
> without this is crap.

Headers are not required by any of the proposals for correct operation.
Why are you trying to make new headers a requirement? Beyond providing
the information, these proposals should ONLY suggest how the information
might be used in LOCAL policy actions.


Raymond S Brand