Re: [MLIST] Re: [Asrg] Is there anything good enough? - Spoofing stats

[David Walker <antispam@grax.com>]

On Thursday 08 May 2003 02:59 pm, Vernon Schryver wrote:
> That logic is based on the dubious assumption that only maliciousness
> can cause bogus sender addresses.  Better logic is that mail with bogus
> sender addresses cannot be replied to or bounced, and that bogus sender
> addresses are often but not always an indication of attempted deceipt.
Of course.  How silly of me.  Your logic is much superior.  What was I 
thinking?

> The phrase "abuse MX records" is wrong and inappropriate.  No "abuse"
> is involved.
You're going to have to give stronger evidence than that.  MX records are 
there to say "this machine accepts e-mail".  They have no designed function 
to say "this machine sends e-mail".  It is telling people to PUSH on a door 
that says "PULL".  It will work if the door is configured to swing on both 
directions but it is not the recommended logical way of doing things.

> I understood you to be advocating, no demanding that the sending and
> receiving ISP be the same since any other mail is "spoofed."  In many
> and probably most cases, that restriction is the same as requiring that
> sending and receiving MTAs be the same set of machines.
You are confused.  I am advocating that the domain administrator (ISP doesn't 
matter) be allowed to control which machines may send mail for his domain.
That person can allow any set of machines from a single machine up to the 
entire internet to send mail from his domain.
The admins of a domain should be allowed to control their own domain.

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg