On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 11:30:15AM -0800, Michael Thomas wrote:
Frank Ellermann wrote:
Michael Thomas wrote:
Part of the problem is that "softfail" and "hardfail" don't make
much intuitive sense.
For SPF (and Sender ID) a SOFTFAIL is what SSP has as t-flag, and
an Authentication-Results: hardfail is just a FAIL (for SPF etc.).
For receivers accepting "hardfail", not exactly the ideal course,
but receivers are free to shoot into their own foot. Aim higher.
Well, FWIW, I don't think that t=testing is at all helpful either. What,
for example, does p=strict, t=testing mean? It seems like a silly-state
to me and ripe for confusion. It's that sort of subjective state that we
should both learn from SPF and avoid.
+1
--
:: Jeff Macdonald | Director of Messaging Technologies
:: e-Dialog | jmacdonald(_at_)e-dialog(_dot_)com
:: 131 Hartwell Ave. | Lexington, MA 02421
:: v: 781-372-1922 | f: 781-863-8118
:: www.e-dialog.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html