[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Source routing -- why not?

To: John Levine <johnl@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Source routing -- why not?
From: Tony Finch <dot@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:43:40 +0000
Cc: ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/mail-archive/>
List-id: <ietf-mxcomp.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-mxcomp-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
References: <>
Sender: owner-ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxxxxxxx

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, John Levine wrote:
>
> After further deliberation about source routing and SPF, I have come
> around to the conclusion that Frank is to some degree right, and if
> you want to use SPF/Sender-ID, you should use source routes.

Source routes require all mail servers to be open relays.

Tony.
-- 
f.a.n.finch  <dot@xxxxxxxx>  http://dotat.at/
MALIN HEBRIDES: NORTHEAST 4 OR 5 INCREASING 6. RAIN LATER. GOOD BECOMING
MODERATE.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Source routing -- why not?
  - From: John R Levine
- Re: Source routing -- why not?
  - From: Alex van den Bogaerdt

References:
- Source routing -- why not?
  - From: John Levine

Prev by Date: Re: Complaint on personal attack by Matthew Elvey
Next by Date: Re: Source routing -- why not?
Previous by thread: Re: Source routing -- why not?
Next by thread: Re: Source routing -- why not?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread