In <bumsnt$rjb$1(_at_)sea(_dot_)gmane(_dot_)org> "Za'mbori, Zolta'n"
<zamboriz(_at_)axelero(_dot_)hu> writes:
I mean "half-power" filtering is possible very soon with just giving
the empty envelope address '<>' to the SPF-query routine for all
incoming email. So in the beginning SPF-query just check the helo
string and not the MAIL FROM address. Forwarding will work
"full-power" while SPF will work "half-power" for some weeks or month.
I think using SPF to check the HELO string has some merit. IIUC,
SpamAssassin will often fall back to checking the HELO string instead
of the envelope from because the latter is often not available.
Checking the HELO string is also one of the advantages to DRIP.
Now, it could be claimed that the HELO string should only be checked
if the when the MTA actually uses a MAIL FROM:<>. However, how often
will an MTA change its HELO string depending on whether it is nul
sender? If it isn't going to change it, then isn't it better to fail
all the time and immediately rather than fail only some of the time
and later? Will people really notice that bounces are being rejected
due to malformed HELO strings?
-wayne
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.9.4.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡