Re: [Asrg] Caching an authentication value

[david nicol <whatever@davidnicol.com>]

verifying the RAPNAP (Return Address, Peer Network Address Pair)
that is in use instead of every individual message would work as well,
and only allows spam from respectable ISPs.



> >However, the bottom line here, is that why go through the trouble of
> >checking every single message. Granted that it increases costs,
> >nevertheless if we can significantly reduce the problem through
> >verification of MTAs as opposed to senders and messages, why go through
> >the extra costs of message verification. This proposal is on the table,
> >but we will pursue it only if a significant advantage vs. costs can be
> >proven for this way of doing things, over others requiring less costs.
> 
> A simple overhead reduction enhancement would be to include an "interval
> during which it was valid" value in the reply from the authentication
> process.  Why generate a unique authenticator for every message sent?
> Instead, use the same authenticator for all messages sent by an individual
> for a period determined by the sending mail administrator, perhaps a few
> hours.


-- 
david nicol
Late to bed and late to rise makes it difficult to quote Poor Richard.



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