On 12/6/03 1:25 PM, Bill Cole at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From what I have been able to glean from people who seem to have seen more detail than the press release, this really is as simple as it sounds: a public key in DNS and a signature of the message (probably including key headers) in a header, making it so that all mail using this method would need to funnel through a mail server operated by the domain owner of the return path domain.
Which seems to me is incompatible with a lot of the Port 25 blocking that goes on right now. For instance, if I'm travelling and using the internet connection at a hotel, I still want to be able to send using my regular address (yes, I know, return-path and From header are technically not the same but for most mail clients, they are). If I'm blocked from reaching my own mail server, then I can't send using the desired address.
Right. Port 25 blocking will become a serious problem for users of roaming dialup, as well as for the mail clients and servers that can't talk SMTP on alternative ports (587 is actually a standard) for their roaming clients. Universally standardized sender authentication will change the rules of what is best practice for those people from the current conventional wisdom that you should just send through the network-local MTA with whatever address you like. Once we start to see sender authentication widely practiced (whether with the yahoo domain keys model or one of the other models coming out of the ASRG) it will be necessary for people to tie the address they use to a particular outbound mail server that will vouch for it.
--
Bill Cole
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
############################################################# This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Send administrative queries to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
