On Dec 6, 2003, at 1:36 PM, Larry Stone wrote:
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.
This is the thing that came out to me as well. I also wonder about servers like CommuniGatePro which reports your main domain (based on your license key) instead of the virtual domain, would this also cause such a technique to fail?
-- Larry Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.stonejongleux.com/
Dale
############################################################# 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]>
