Re: mnt-nfy
- Date: Mon, 21 Oct 96 10:16:26 +0100
> From davidk@localhost Fri Oct 18 18:33:24 1996
Dear David,
> > My point at the RIPE meeting was that when sending an update with a Reply-to,
> > the mnt-nfy DOES get a "warning" message, that somebody made SOME updates,
> > (since the "Congratulations" are sent to her), but has no clue wrt. WHAT
> > exactly has been modified (usually the Subject: line does not provide accurate
> > information - if at all)...
>
> This is true. You will receive less information then with a notification
> message in this case. This is clearly a disadvantage, but also an
> advantage for those people that are getting a bit tired of the amount of
> mails coming from the RIPE database automatic department.
OK. I understand now, this really IS a feature.
>
> > (Of course, the situation can be even worse if the From: line is forged...)
>
> But you will always get at least one message from the database whether it
> is an ACK message or a notify message. The smartness only eliminates more
> mails sent to one and the same E-mail address. And again ripe-dbm@localhost
> is always willing to investigate with the maillogs if you suspect
> someting like this (in fact I *did* found a forgery once and I can assure
> you that the person that did it will not do it another time ...)
In fact I knew the NCC has very good logging (I once had to use
this "service" :) ), but I thought we could spare some investigation.
However, if such "errors" are infrequent, I agree it is not worth
changing the behaviour.
>
> > PS. I suppose (and strongly hope :)) the authentication is based on the From:
> > and not the Reply-to:.
>
> I can tell you from first hand experience (that is the code is
> implemented as required in the specs) that the authentication is done on
> the From: field and nothing else then that.
This is what I wanted to hear, thank you. :) (I do not worry any more).
Thanks again and regards,
Janos
|