Melting proposals together

Gentlemen, 

I've spent some time to compare the proposals. As you will see from 
the new version of my RMX draft which will hopefully be finished until
weekend, I try to describe RMX not as a monolithic method, but as 
a sequence of several steps. Where these steps do not differ from
other proposals, we might be able to discuss and find an agreement
fast. Actually, I don't see real conflicts between the proposals, 
I think they could fit together.

For now, I'd like to raise a question about where we differ:


What do we focus on? 

- EHLO/HELO name
- envelope sender
- header sender (From:)


I actually have doubts about the EHLO/HELO name. There is 
no need for a MTA to announce the sender domain names in the 
HELO name. The HELO name should be the name of the machine, not
related to the following emails. E.g. the machine delivering 
this particular email for me is sklave3.rackland.de, but it 
delivers from [email protected].

How can we assume that this name can be used for sender
authorization if it is not sufficiently related to the sender?


A second problem is that this could break existing software.
Many MTAs do not give a proper name at HELO/EHLO, or do not
issue this command at all. 


regards
Hadmut