CallerID & SPF

  • Thread starter Thread starter John Coutts
  • Start date Start date
J

John Coutts

After reviewing both proposals in some detail, I have come to the conclusion
that Microsoft's CallerID proposal is inherantly flawed. Why? Because SPF
operates at the SMTP stage using the MAIL FROM: address. The flow of garbage
(alias Spam) is stopped before it is even transmitted. CallerID on the other
hand, operates on information that occurs after the DATA phase has begun. The
garbage has already been transmitted, and the spam engine will probably ignore
any error messages sent subsequently. This in turn encourages background
processing and leads to futile attempts to bounce the message.

Microsoft may have unlimited bandwidth and resources, but I don't.

J.A. Coutts
 
John Coutts said:
After reviewing both proposals in some detail, I have come to the conclusion
that Microsoft's CallerID proposal is inherantly flawed. Why? Because SPF
operates at the SMTP stage using the MAIL FROM: address. The flow of garbage
(alias Spam) is stopped before it is even transmitted. CallerID on the other
hand, operates on information that occurs after the DATA phase has begun. The
garbage has already been transmitted, and the spam engine will probably ignore
any error messages sent subsequently. This in turn encourages background
processing and leads to futile attempts to bounce the message.

Microsoft may have unlimited bandwidth and resources, but I don't.

J.A. Coutts
Click to expand...

Thanks for the viewpoint, but what does it have to do with DNS?

--
Regards,
Ace

Please direct all replies to the newsgroup so all can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS-IS" with no warranties and confers no
rights.

Ace Fekay, MCSE 2000, MCSE+I, MCSA, MCT, MVP
Microsoft Windows MVP - Active Directory
 
Thanks for the viewpoint, but what does it have to do with DNS?
Click to expand...
********************* REPLY SEPARATER *********************
Both of these proposals deal extensively with DNS records. I would even go so
far as to say that it is all DNS, although the bulk of it is client side. One
of these, or perhaps a combination of these will eventually rise to the surface
and DNS administrators will have to deal with it, like it or not.
 
John Coutts said:
********************* REPLY SEPARATER *********************
Both of these proposals deal extensively with DNS records. I would even go so
far as to say that it is all DNS, although the bulk of it is client side. One
of these, or perhaps a combination of these will eventually rise to the surface
and DNS administrators will have to deal with it, like it or not.
Click to expand...

Hmm, maybe I have't been keeping up with my research and reading up on SPF.
So does that use SRVs to help in determining SPAM? I always assumed, once
the record has been resolved, then it attempts the SMTP session., but
apparently from what you're saying there's an extra step involved?

Maybe I'm not seeing it or just haven't read up enough on the subject. If
you don't mind, maybe there's others out here in the groups in the same
position I'm in and could use a little enlightenment on the subject.


--
Regards,
Ace

Please direct all replies to the newsgroup so all can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS-IS" with no warranties and confers no
rights.

Ace Fekay, MCSE 2000, MCSE+I, MCSA, MCT, MVP
Microsoft Windows MVP - Active Directory
 
Hmm, maybe I have't been keeping up with my research and reading up on SPF.
So does that use SRVs to help in determining SPAM? I always assumed, once
the record has been resolved, then it attempts the SMTP session., but
apparently from what you're saying there's an extra step involved?

Maybe I'm not seeing it or just haven't read up enough on the subject. If
you don't mind, maybe there's others out here in the groups in the same
position I'm in and could use a little enlightenment on the subject.
Click to expand...
******************** REPLY SEPARATER ********************
Both proposals involve properly advertising not only the MX receiving servers,
but also the sending servers. There are many similarities, but also some
differences (one I have already mentioned).

SPF (Sender Policy Framework) is at http://spf.pobox.com/ and has an RFC draft
published.
 
In
Both proposals involve properly advertising not only the MX receiving
servers, but also the sending servers. There are many similarities,
but also some differences (one I have already mentioned).

SPF (Sender Policy Framework) is at http://spf.pobox.com/ and has an
RFC draft published.
Click to expand...


THanks for posting that link. I'l have to take a closer look at it.
--
Regards,
Ace

Please direct all replies to the newsgroup so all can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS-IS" with no warranties and confers no
rights.

Ace Fekay, MCSE 2000, MCSE+I, MCSA, MCT, MVP
Microsoft Windows MVP - Active Directory
 
Back
Top