On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 12:34 PM Brandon Long <bl...@google.com> wrote:
> When forwarding mail, there are two options: rewrite the envelope sender > or not. There are a variety of pros and cons to both of them, and cases > where one or the other is more prominent. Not rewriting has been the > dominant form of 1:1 forwarding such as aliases and address migration, and > enforcing SPF -all would break that use case. > If you ask me - a better solution would be to do away with forwarding completely and incorporate POP checks, like Gmail does. This alleviates all of the issues with forwarding mail in relation to SPF and DKIM. But I know that stance is wildly unpopular since it breaks the "it used to work that way" narrative. But at some point you add so much to a system that it becomes so bloated and overloaded that nothing can be accomplished. The more simple a system is the more efficient it is going to be. Outside of external mail server forwarders, a properly constructed SPF record can go a long, long way towards alleviating the spam problem. How much is it worth to keep external forwarders working at the cost of spam prevention? If forwarding mail is so important, can a better system for handling forwarded mail be developed? I'm just not sure if the answer is to continue to add systems and directives to email to solve all of this.
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
