Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed,please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"
Carl Hutzler <[email protected]> Thu, 26 May 2005 10:47:58 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.mxcomp |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
[email protected] wrote: > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Arnt Gulbrandsen [mailto:[email protected]] >>Sent: donderdag 26 mei 2005 15:41 >>To: [email protected] >>Cc: Mark >>Subject: Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is >>fundamentally flawed,please subscribe at >>http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/" >> >> >> >>Mark writes: >> >> > > > >>>SPF is inter-MTA based, and requires no changes to email clients >>>whatso-frickin-ever. >>> >>> >>The first time I looked at SPF was because I wanted to ensure that an >>email client was okay. Specifically, I wanted to check outgoing mail >>from a roadwarrior machine, and warn the user before sending any mail >>that would likely fail. >> >>That job wasn't so easy. Not so easy. >> >> > >It is up to the ISP/MTA how to deal with their roaming users. Typically, >SMTP AUTH / DRAC is used (that has nothing to do with SPF even, but >everything with your ISP not being an open relay and still allowing its >customers roaming access). So, if you send mail, from the road, through >the relay you authorized, then that relay should SPF "pass" you (provided >you use the correct domain name, of course). > >Sending through someone else's, unauthorized relay may, indeed, present a >problem on the receiving end if they check SPF (and thus would reject your >mail). But that is the whole point: either we allow everyone to use every >domain name through every relay (they have access to), or we specify >authorized relays. If we do the latter, then naturally doing the former >will no longer work. I believe that is a good thing. > >It will take some mentality adjusting, though; like way back when, when >people said: "I used to be able to send through every SMTP server I >wanted; and now, dangit, I can only use the ones I have been given >access to." That change, too, was a good thing. > > BTW, this issue of allowing someone to send through "someone else's relay" is a problem for ALL email authentication approaches except perhaps CSV and BATV. DomainKeys, SPF, IIM, and SID all have an issue until we can get MUAs to sign with DK/IIM. -Carl -- Carl Hutzler Director, Host Mail Development America Online [email protected] 703.265.5521 work 703.915.6862 cell