Re: [Asrg] seeking comments on new RMX article

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

Mike,

DC>> those are not mail protocols.
MR> True, but they are "other methods which a mobile user may use to send
MR> mail."

no they are not.

in some cases, they are other methods for running smtp, besides using a
raw tcp/ip channel.

but they ultimately either use smtp or they are not for email.

please let's try not to introduce "let's invent new and special ways for
individual sites to do special things."  non-standardized methods do not
scale to the rest of the Internet.


MR> In any case, introducing RMX involves far less work than replacing SMTP,

and it does not accomplish what you seem to think it accomplishes.

you have not addressed the minor problem that failure to find an rmx
record has ambiguous meaning.  hence it is not at all clear what the
benefit is when you DO find the entry.


SN>> If the RMX matches the IP, it's a good bet the domain is not forged.
SN>> If the RMX doesn't match, all bets are off.
 MR> One more case here--if RMX is present and doesn't match, the message is
MR> definitely forged (or the system is misconfigured).

You are quite wrong.  When you do not find a matching rmx record, the
only thing you know is that there is no rmx record.  There are at least
two different reasons possible.  forgery is only one of them.

d/
--
 Dave Crocker <mailto:[e-mail]>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
 Sunnyvale, CA  USA <tel:[phone]>, <fax:[phone]>

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg