Re: [Asrg] What are the IPs that sends mail for a domain?

Bill Cole <asrg3@billmail.scconsult.com> Fri, 19 June 2009 02:43 UTC

Return-Path: <asrg3@billmail.scconsult.com>
X-Original-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 152DB3A67A1 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 19:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.766
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.766 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.167, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lnRNBqSgcbNs for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 19:43:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from toaster.scconsult.com (toaster.scconsult.com [66.73.230.185]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C16E73A6765 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 19:43:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bigsky.scconsult.com (bigsky.scconsult.com [192.168.2.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by toaster.scconsult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1984F8D73DD for <asrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 22:43:34 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <4A3AFB54.9020909@billmail.scconsult.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 22:43:32 -0400
From: Bill Cole <asrg3@billmail.scconsult.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090408 Eudora/3.0b2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
References: <10520166.1991245216397431.JavaMail.franck@somehost-55.sv2.equinix.net>
In-Reply-To: <10520166.1991245216397431.JavaMail.franck@somehost-55.sv2.equinix.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Asrg] What are the IPs that sends mail for a domain?
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: asrg@irtf.org
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 02:43:25 -0000

Franck Martin wrote, On 6/17/09 1:27 AM:
> Sure, it is the the be strict in what you send, lenient in what you
> receive.

Yes, and with all due respect to Jon Postel, that principle is better suited 
to the Internet of the 1980's than it is to the Internet today. When there 
were a small number of ultimate authorities who put a de facto ceiling on 
leniency and the net was treated as a carefully watched experiment rather 
than as a production utility,

> If we don't specify some RFC/BCP to specify how SMTP over IPv6 should be
> negotiated, then no one will follow.
>
> We could say something like all emails on IPv6 must have a DKIM
> signature, have RDNS helo, etc... as there is not much of an
> implementation with IPv6, there is a chance for these practices to be
> adopted from day one...

As John pointed out, "Day One" is in the past and the IETF is hostile *as a 
matter of principle* to defining application layers differently for IPv6.

I don't think that principle is wrong. Also, I can't think of many examples 
of RFC's successfully performing the role you describe of leading a 
significant change in practice rather than describing what is already widely 
being done to good effect.

Put more directly: if you want something to end up as de facto mandatory and 
have a chance of ending up in an RFC, you have to start by getting it 
enforced by many working production systems.

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bill Cole"<asrg3@billmail.scconsult.com>
> To: "Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF"<asrg@irtf.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, 16 June, 2009 10:14:02 PM GMT +01:00
>    Amsterdam / Berlin / Bern / Rome / Stockholm / Vienna
> Subject: Re: [Asrg] What are the IPs that sends mail for a domain?
>
> Franck Martin wrote, On 6/16/09 11:33 PM:
>> Knowing that mail servers are not deployed on IPv6, what would it take
>> to make all these requirements mandatory for IPv6 and start with a
>> better infrastructure than on IPv4?
>
> How do you make anything mandatory on the net?
>
> RFC 821 is one of a handful of Internet Standards, and it is violated
> routinely by spammers and non-spammers for no better reason than that
> they never bothered to read it. That is possible because the major MTA's
> are functional when misconfigured (e.g. with a bogus name for EHLO/HELO
> use) and by default tolerate clients which violate standards.
>
> The only way anything can be functionally mandatory for email transport
> is if major MTA's will not work unless configured to comply and by
> default will not interoperate with clients that do not comply. RFC's are
> great, but they do not enforce themselves. If the big freemail providers
> and sites running Sendmail, Exchange, and Postfix generally accept mail
> from non-compliant clients, there will be a lot of non-compliant clients.
> To make good behavior mandatory, bad behavior has to break with enough
> frequency that it's easier to comply than negotiate exemptions.
>
> _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list
> Asrg@irtf.org http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg