On 4/4/16 5:45 AM, Jeremy Harris wrote:
> On 04/04/16 13:01, Jim Fenton wrote:
>> On 4/4/16 3:14 AM, Jeremy Harris wrote:
>>> On 01/04/16 23:18, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 06:48:00PM -0300, Chris Newman wrote:
>>>>> I feel very strongly that policy for SMTP relay should be advertised by
>>>>> SMTP and protected by SMTP TLS.
>>>> Unfortunately, in MTA-to-MTA SMTP, the receiving SMTP server has
>>>> no idea what domain the sending SMTP client wants to deliver mail
>>>> to at the time that it advertises its ESMTP extensions in the EHLO
>>>> response.
>>> Why must it be done then?  Why not at RCPT TO time, via some suitable
>>> response?
>> It's not even possible at RCPT TO time, for example if the message is
>> being forwarded.
> Has been forwarded, and the RCPT is post-forwarding?  Rules for the
> current recipient apply.
>
> Is about to be forwarded, and the RCPT is pre-forwarding?  Rules
> for the current recipient apply.
>
> I don't see your point; please elucidate?

Viktor's other comment was:
> For this (and other related) reasons, in-band SMTP security policy
> can only be communicated for the given SMTP server, and not the
> recipient domain.

I'm pointing out one of the other related reasons that isn't addressed
by doing the response at RCPT TO time.

-Jim


_______________________________________________
Uta mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta

Reply via email to