Re: Interpreting "v=spf1"

ietf-mxcomp

Re: Interpreting "v=spf1"

2004-09-14 18:59:30


On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 08:17:51PM -0500, wayne wrote:
| 
| "Records that begin with v=spf1 MUST be interpreted as spf2.0/mailfrom,helo"
| 

I agree with the sentiment behind this suggestion.  It might
even be more useful if v=spf1 records were defined to mean

  spf2.0/pra,mailfrom,helo,pra

or perhaps

  spf2.0/pra,mailfrom,helo,pra,ptr

and if a sender is uncomfortable with those semantics then
they should publish proper spf2.0 records that override the
v1 entries.

[More with this subject...]

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: Work plan for Sender ID, (continued) Re: Work plan for Sender ID, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. Re: Work plan for Sender ID, william(at)elan.net Re: Work plan for Sender ID, Stephane Bortzmeyer Re: Work plan for Sender ID, Yakov Shafranovich Re: Interpreting "v=spf1" (was Work plan for Sender ID), Mark Lentczner Re: Interpreting "v=spf1" (was Work plan for Sender ID), Yakov Shafranovich Re: Interpreting "v=spf1", wayne Re: Interpreting "v=spf1", Mark Lentczner Re: Interpreting "v=spf1", wayne RE: Interpreting "v=spf1", terry Re: Interpreting "v=spf1", Meng Weng Wong <= Re: Interpreting "v=spf1", Mark Re: Interpreting "v=spf1", Margaret Olson Re: Interpreting "v=spf1", Frank Ellermann Misinformation - Re: Interpreting "v=spf1" (was Work plan for Sender ID), Matthew Elvey Re: Work plan for Sender ID, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. Re: Work plan for Sender ID, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.

Previous by Date:	RE: Interpreting "v=spf1", terry
Next by Date:	RHSBLs (was Re: HELO, IPR, A&R ..., Matthew Elvey
Previous by Thread:	RE: Interpreting "v=spf1", terry
Next by Thread:	Re: Interpreting "v=spf1", Mark
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]