mail-vet-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [mail-vet-discuss] Reworked section 2 (for -13)

2008-03-11 17:56:44
On 3/11/08, Scott Kitterman <mail-vet-discuss(_at_)kitterman(_dot_)com> wrote:
On Tuesday 11 March 2008 19:50:33 Dotzero wrote:
Murray,

After reviewing section 2.4.3 I think it should be split out
separately for SPF and Sender-ID. A pass for SPF does not mean the
same thing as a pass for SIDF. Conflating the two is a recipe for
problems. Mail From pass from SPF is totally different from PRA pass
from SIDF.

Yes.  This is definitely true.

Since PRA = From = Mail From about 80% of the time, it's an 80% solution.  80%
is good enough for Microsoft (I guess).  Unless that's good enough for you,
I'd say they ought to be disambiguated.


You forgot to include the % of time that PRA=Sender and not From.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html 

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>