Re: MTS transparency and anonymity

[Tony Finch <dot@xxxxxxxx>]

> > We've found that SMTP call-back return path verification is quite
> > effective, though it has very nasty behaviour for the victims of joe jobs.
>
> I have somewhat different experience - I've found that SMTP call-back
> verification often produces unnecessary failures, as it's not unusual for
> the sender's SMTP server to fail to respond promptly even though the
> message is legitimate.

Oh yes, I didn't say it was easy to use and without interop problems :-)
But they can be mitigated with judicious use of exemption lists etc.

> [bounce address verification]  Though IMHO all of these systems are
> "not ready for prime time" and it's way too early to try to avoid
> duplicating effort.

Indeed. Which is why I'm working on my own flavour of the idea so we get
as many data points as possible.

Tony.
-- 
f.a.n.finch  <dot@xxxxxxxx>  http://dotat.at/
BISCAY: NORTHEAST 5 OR 6 BECOMING VARIABLE 3 OR 4, THEN SOUTHWEST 4 OR 5 LATER
IN NORTH. OCCASIONAL RAIN. MAINLY GOOD.