Hi Greg,
> > At least it's
> > been written by someone who knows who to write an RFC.
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fecyk-dmp-01.txt >
> The author still makes false claims and doesn't seem to
> understand the purpose, nor the limitations, of the SMTP
> envelope sender address.
>
> The whole idea of both proposals is based on false assumptions.
I haven't had the time to read the draft. Would you care to enlighten me a bit? Besides the forward-issue the SPF concept seems like a good concept to me. What are the false assumptions and how do they interfere with the usability of SPF?
