I'm about to post about MTX to the Anti-Spam Research Group's discussion mailing list: http://asrg.sp.am/about/lists.shtml This appears to be the best next step toward RFC.
MTX HELO - need to comment on this On 02/15, Jonas Eckerman wrote: > * Or, make a MTX checker traverse domain from the one it checks towards > the registry boundary when checking for policy. This means more DNS > lookups but might be easier to administrate. (I have a vague > recollection that DKIM or ADSP works this way... Not sure though) Icky. > "policy" seems better than "participant" to me. Sounds good to me. It's shorter. On 02/14, Jonas Eckerman wrote: > If anyone connects from a host where reverse lookup or HELO puts it in > "frukt.org" domain, you know that your should reject or score high > unless it has FCDNS and a matching MTX record. How useful do you think it is to validate the HELO against MTX? I'm thinking I don't really care, and it adds extra complication. Sure, in the short term, it would catch some spam, but a spammer can set the HELO to anything they want, without consequence, and can just as easily set it to match the IP they're sending from. Also, SPF HELO covers it. -- "For gasoline vapor, the explosive range is from 1.3 to 6.0% vapor to air...useful against soft targets such as...armored vehicles...and bunkers." - http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/fae.htm http://www.ChaosReigns.com
