Text 654, 274 rader
Skriven 2004-09-19 12:05:30 av Rich (1:379/45)
Kommentar till text 647 av Geo. (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: AOL Says "no" to Sender ID
======================================
From: "Rich" <@>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_01DB_01C49E40.F5A87510
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
That it is optional and an optimization only is relevant. Yes, it is =
something the sender optionally does.
PRA.
Rich
"Geo." <georger@nls.net> wrote in message =
news:414d9e7a$1@w3.nls.net...
The fact that it's optional is irrelevant, it runs on the sending =
server yes?
Perhaps this discussion would be easier if you explain something. =
What you
said that caught my interest is
" The article then went on to say that AOL would publish Sender-ID
information, They just were not going to perform the extra checks =
for
their users. If you are not an AOL user this is great as it gives =
you
everything
you need. Only AOL users suffer."
So the question I need you to explain is, if AOL is running all the =
SPF checks,
then the only difference is the PRA and SO checks and without the =
other end
including SO submitter information I fail to see how SenderID would =
generate
any more benefit for AOL users than simply doing the SPF check?
That's not real clear but if all you have to work with is the SPF TXT =
record,
what does SenderID get from that which SPF lacks?
Geo. (folks forgive the long quoteback but it's needed)
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:414cc7e5@w3.nls.net...
It's optional and an optimization only.
Rich
"Geo." <georger@nls.net> wrote in message =
news:414ca69d$1@w3.nls.net...
So adding a SUBMITTER=3D entry on the MAIL FROM command is done by =
the
receiver?
That makes no sense at all, MAIL FROM command is constructed by the =
sending
server.
Geo.
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:414b0f94$1@w3.nls.net...
You understand it wrong. The recipient checks. It wouldn't make =
any
sense
otherwise since no spammer or forger would check his own forged =
emails.
Rich
"Geo." <georger@nls.net> wrote in message =
news:414ab403$1@w3.nls.net...
Actually I believe it does matter because the difference between =
SPF and
SenderID is the server side and if I understand it right it is =
used to
verify
the sender who is sending the email, ie it's the outbound server =
that needs
to
run it.
Geo.
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:414a6377@w3.nls.net...
Maybe it is the same or close. Doesn't matter. To the rest of =
the
world
there is no difference. Only AOL users lose.
Rich
"Geo." <georger@nls.net> wrote in message =
news:414a1eb9$1@w3.nls.net...
How does that differ from supporting only SPF? I mean if I =
understand
things
right, Sender ID is SPF plus 2 other server side functions, if =
AOL says
they
will publish SenderID information then that's basically saying =
they will
support SPF but not the other two parts that make up the =
difference
between
SPF
and SenderID..
Geo.
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:414a156f$1@w3.nls.net...
The article then went on to say that AOL would publish =
Sender-ID
information, They just were not going to perform the extra =
checks for
their
users. If you are not an AOL user this is great as it gives you
everything
you
need. Only AOL users suffer.
Rich
------=_NextPart_000_01DB_01C49E40.F5A87510
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.3790.186" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> That it is optional and an =
optimization only is relevant. Yes, it is something the sender =
optionally=20
does.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> PRA.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Geo." <<A =
href=3D"mailto:georger@nls.net">georger@nls.net</A>> wrote=20
in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:414d9e7a$1@w3.nls.net">news:414d9e7a$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>The=20
fact that it's optional is irrelevant, it runs on the sending server=20
yes?<BR><BR>Perhaps this discussion would be easier if you explain=20
something. What you<BR>said that caught my interest =
is<BR><BR>" =20
The article then went on to say that AOL would publish=20
Sender-ID<BR> information, They just were not =
going to=20
perform the extra checks for<BR> their users. =
If you=20
are not an AOL user this is great as it gives=20
you<BR>everything<BR> you need. Only AOL users =
suffer."<BR><BR>So the question I need you to explain is, if AOL is =
running=20
all the SPF checks,<BR>then the only difference is the PRA and SO =
checks and=20
without the other end<BR>including SO submitter information I fail to =
see how=20
SenderID would generate<BR>any more benefit for AOL users than simply =
doing=20
the SPF check?<BR><BR>That's not real clear but if all you have to =
work with=20
is the SPF TXT record,<BR>what does SenderID get from that which SPF=20
lacks?<BR><BR>Geo. (folks forgive the long quoteback but it's=20
needed)<BR><BR><BR>"Rich" <@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:414cc7e5@w3.nls.net">news:414cc7e5@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>&nbs=
p; =20
It's optional and an optimization only.<BR><BR>Rich<BR><BR> =
"Geo."=20
<<A href=3D"mailto:georger@nls.net">georger@nls.net</A>> wrote =
in message=20
<A=20
=
href=3D"news:414ca69d$1@w3.nls.net">news:414ca69d$1@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>=
=20
So adding a SUBMITTER=3D entry on the MAIL FROM command is done by=20
the<BR>receiver?<BR> That makes no sense at all, MAIL FROM =
command is=20
constructed by the sending<BR> server.<BR><BR> =
Geo.<BR><BR> =20
"Rich" <@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:414b0f94$1@w3.nls.net">news:414b0f94$1@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>=
=20
You understand it wrong. The recipient checks. It wouldn't =
make=20
any<BR>sense<BR> otherwise since no spammer or forger would =
check his=20
own forged emails.<BR><BR> Rich<BR><BR> "Geo." =
<<A=20
href=3D"mailto:georger@nls.net">georger@nls.net</A>> wrote in =
message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:414ab403$1@w3.nls.net">news:414ab403$1@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>=
=20
Actually I believe it does matter because the difference between SPF=20
and<BR> SenderID is the server side and if I =
understand it=20
right it is used to<BR>verify<BR> the sender who is =
sending=20
the email, ie it's the outbound server that needs<BR> =20
to<BR> run it.<BR><BR> =20
Geo.<BR><BR> "Rich" <@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:414a6377@w3.nls.net">news:414a6377@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>&nbs=
p; =20
Maybe it is the same or close. Doesn't matter. To the rest =
of=20
the<BR>world<BR> there is no difference. Only =
AOL=20
users lose.<BR><BR> =20
Rich<BR><BR> "Geo." <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:georger@nls.net">georger@nls.net</A>> wrote in =
message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:414a1eb9$1@w3.nls.net">news:414a1eb9$1@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>=
=20
How does that differ from supporting only SPF? I mean if I=20
understand<BR> things<BR> right, =
Sender ID=20
is SPF plus 2 other server side functions, if AOL says<BR> =20
they<BR> will publish SenderID =
information then=20
that's basically saying they will<BR> =
support=20
SPF but not the other two parts that make up the=20
difference<BR>between<BR> =20
SPF<BR> and=20
SenderID..<BR><BR> =20
Geo.<BR><BR> "Rich" <@> wrote in =
message=20
<A=20
=
href=3D"news:414a156f$1@w3.nls.net">news:414a156f$1@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>=
=20
The article then went on to say that AOL would publish=20
Sender-ID<BR> information, They =
just were=20
not going to perform the extra checks for<BR> =20
their<BR> users. If you are not an =
AOL=20
user this is great as it gives you<BR>everything<BR> =
you<BR> need. Only AOL users=20
suffer.<BR><BR> =20
Rich<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_01DB_01C49E40.F5A87510--
--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
* Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)
|