On Sat, 9 Jul 2005, Rob MacGregor wrote:
On 08/07/05, Neil Harkins <nharkins(_at_)well(_dot_)com> wrote:
Hi. I used fetchmail for a few projects over the past 10 years,
and was curious how it deals with SPF (Sender Policy Framework,
http://spf.pobox.com).
Given that it pre-dates it, I'd say not at all :-)
sendmail predates SPF, yet it can support SPF.
fetchmail is a tool, with maintainers, that has added
new features to be compatible with new standards.
Ultimately, mail aggregation like fetchmail is the main
problem with SPF. I started the thread to see if any thought
has been given towards making it work, instead of ignoring
what is an otherwise admirable anti-spam effort.
If --mda gets around it with most mailers, then
it certainly seems like something worth mentioning
in the documentation.
I see in the fetchmail 5.0 feature list that:
* Fetchmail can be told to fall back to delivering
via local sendmail if it can't open port 25.
Is there any way to make that the primary behavior
instead of just a "fall-back"?
Why not just configure your install of fetchmail to deliver that way?
Surely that's easier than breaking everybody elses install :-)
I'm asking if that precedence can be *configured* in the conf,
not asking the default behavior to change in the code,
and "break everyone else's install".
Then again, if the MTA handled piped mail similarly to mail
received over port 25, by inserting the machine's default ip
address, it still wouldn't work. Not sure if the MTAs do
that or not...
Anyway, any thoughts on the matter would be greatly appreciated!
Adding to what others have said, you may want to configure your system
such that connections on the loopback interface are exempt from SPF
checks. That should solve the problem.
Yes, in most cases that would work, however some may use fetchmail
from a shell account where they don't have root.
-neil