IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Asrg] draft-irtf-asrg-criteria is missing Outbound MTA definition.

Ian Eiloart <iane@sussex.ac.uk> Mon, 29 June 2009 08:12 UTC

Return-Path: <iane@sussex.ac.uk>
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 F0A4328C192 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 01:12:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.309, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799]
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 jlZA0-hUxu1r for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 01:12:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from karpinski.uscs.susx.ac.uk (karpinski.uscs.susx.ac.uk [139.184.14.85]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E609D28C18E for <asrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 01:12:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lewes.staff.uscs.susx.ac.uk ([139.184.134.43]:64946) by karpinski.uscs.susx.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.64) (envelope-from <iane@sussex.ac.uk>) id KLZQUW-0009ZE-NB for asrg@irtf.org; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 09:13:44 +0100
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 09:12:37 +0100
From: Ian Eiloart <iane@sussex.ac.uk>
Sender: iane@sussex.ac.uk
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
Message-ID: <7E7339F784451F2FF12B6C2F@lewes.staff.uscs.susx.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <32FAD477-3720-466B-8A02-464ED4004859@mail-abuse.org>
References: <4A43B696.2000106@cybernothing.org> <94CA8D5B-3281-4884-8221-B3330F689EBF@mail-abuse.org> <7B7CEB6C086D94C295E661B1@lewes.staff.uscs.susx.ac.uk> <32FAD477-3720-466B-8A02-464ED4004859@mail-abuse.org>
Originator-Info: login-token=Mulberry:013sjfOEcpTZ0fNTOaSu5RPVKrREAAkkHuUzM=; token_authority=support@its.sussex.ac.uk
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Mac OS X)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Sussex: true
X-Sussex-transport: remote_smtp
Subject: Re: [Asrg] draft-irtf-asrg-criteria is missing Outbound MTA definition.
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <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: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 08:12:26 -0000

--On 26 June 2009 11:37:21 -0700 Douglas Otis <dotis@mail-abuse.org> wrote:

> This draft fails to include a definition that encompasses a crucial and
> safe point of control essential for effective spam mitigation.  The
> missing definition is that of the Outbound MTA, the entity granting
> access and facilitating public SMTP exchanges to other domains.
> Email-Arch's definition tends to understate the role with: Outbound MTA,
> an MTA that relays messages to other ADMDs.

Defining an "outbound MTA" would be useful, I guess.


>
> What level?

The paper isn't discussing particular proposals, but you seem to be saying 
that it should. It's discussing certain desirable properties of proposals. 
Perhaps you're looking for more detail, or something closer to an actual 
solution.

If you want to say that a desirable proposal would be scalable, then that's 
fine. If you want to say that SPF doesn't scale for a particular reason, 
then that's outside the scope of this proposal.


-- 
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
01273-873148 x3148
For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email