Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt
"Hector Santos" <[email protected]> Wed, 1 Jun 2005 00:36:20 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.mxcomp |
|---|---|
| Organization | Santronics Software, Inc. |
| Message-ID | <003a01c56663$77c853e0$6401a8c0@hdev1> |
----- Original Message ----- From: "Douglas Otis" <[email protected]> To: "Graham Murray" <[email protected]> Cc: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 3:07 PM Subject: Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt > While > possible, with add restrictions imposed by the email provider, the > domain owner remains completely at the mercy of an email provider's > diligence at _every_ MTA involved in the transport of the message, and > not just those MTAs that have been directly authorized by the SPF > record. A mistake on the part of an email provider, such as > misconfiguration of a firewall, and the domain owner's reputation > suffers. And how is CSV immuned from these same set of possible routing scenarioes? Are you saying that once CSV authorizes a submission at the MSA, then there is no need to further perform CSV during the route and only at the MDA? What if you have this topology? MUA ---> MSA1/MTA1 -----> MTA2 ----> MDA3 MSA1 and MDA3 is CVS ready. MTA2 is not. How does MDA3 handle this using CSV? What is the policy here? -- Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc. http://www.santronics.com