RE: [Asrg] 6. Proposals - CRI Draft

That is all a recommendation is..theoretically, if a server is CRI
compliant...the challenge does njot need to go to the sender anyway..so
it doesn't matter who the sender is

> -----Original Message-----
> From: yshafranovich02@sprintpcs.com
[mailto:yshafranovich02@sprintpcs.com]
> On Behalf Of Yakov Shafranovich
> Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 10:06 PM
> To: Eric Dean
> Cc: 'Peter Kay'; asrg@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 6. Proposals - CRI Draft - 4.1 Loop Avoidance
> 
> Can this be left as a recommendation but not required, so the
> implementors will be left to decide? Or do we need to make a decision
on
> this? Also, would this be relevant to the BCP area?
> 
> Eric Dean wrote:
> > If we start adding various messaging such as with DSNs...I don't
think
> > that we should be hijacking a sender's email address to carry
various
> > protocol information.
> >
> > Of course, that's just my opinion and why it's merely a
recommendation
> > rather than a must, shall...
> >
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: asrg-admin@ietf.org [mailto:asrg-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> >
> > Peter
> >
> >>Kay
> >>Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 12:08 PM
> >>To: asrg@ietf.org
> >>Subject: [Asrg] 6. Proposals - CRI Draft - 4.1 Loop Avoidance
> >>
> >>I finally had a chance to come up for air to respond to Eric/Yakov's
> >>draft
> >>at http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-irtf-asrg-cri-00.txt  .
> >>ASRG owes you much for your hard work in creating this document and
I
> >>personally thank you for furthering an important area of
> >>interoperability.
> >>
> >>On loop avoidance section, specifically:
> >>
> >>"For CRI systems that issue challenge messages, it is also
recommended
> >>that each CRI system use a local systemwide user, such as
cri@foo.com,
> >>for issuing challenges rather than preserving the original sender's
> >>email address as the sender of the challenge message."
> >>
> >>We disgree.
> >>
> >>Most CR systems automatically/dynamically add the recipient to the
> >>sender's whitelist.  So if I send an email to eric@cri.com, he's
> >>automatically added to my whitelist.  If the mail-from on his
> >
> > challenge
> >
> >>is eric@cri.com, his email comes straight to my inbox without delays
> >
> > or
> >
> >>filters and certainly won't get challenged.  If the mail-from on his
> >>challenge is "challenger@cri.com", the CRI protocol needs to be
> >
> > invoked,
> >
> >>possibly creating unecessary overhead.
> >>
> >>Keeping the mail-from consistent allows CRI systems to naturally
> >>interoperate and assuming that the CR system adds recipients to the
> >>whitelist, elegantly solves the problem of CR systems challenging
> >
> > other
> >
> >>challenges.
> >>
> >>Peter
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Asrg mailing list
> >>Asrg@ietf.org
> >>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Asrg mailing list
> > Asrg@ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
> >
> 
> 


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

RE: [Asrg] 6. Proposals - CRI Draft - 4.1 Loop Avoidance