Re: "Header Reordering", yet again
2005-05-31 07:41:15
At 14:58 31/05/2005, Hector Santos wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Smith" <paul(_at_)pscs(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk>
To: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody(_at_)xyzzy(_dot_)claranet(_dot_)de>;
<ietf-smtp(_at_)imc(_dot_)org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 9:05 AM
Subject: Re: "Header Reordering", yet again
> >Now you might be able to sort the timestamp lines by their
> >timestamps, or more likely by "I know what happens behind
> >my MX". Or you just use `nslookup -q=mx`.
>
> If you specified that the timestamp on the Received-SPF field MUST be
> IDENTICAL to the timestamp on the Received: line added by the same server,
> that might solve some problems.
>
Good point,
but I'm still scratching my head on this issue, what's the problem again?
Not entirely sure.. I've lost the start of this discussion as the subject
has changed a few times.. :)
Why would a downlink software assume the headers are or could be out of
order? and why would it assume mediocrity exist or even allow it to be
used? I mean, if a piece of software was doing this, then you go to the
developer and shame them for screwing things up. If they don't bother to
fix it, then you dump it and get something else. That's how it usually
works.
Unless that other developer is Microsoft or that of any other widely
deployed software or used by any big ISP. In that case, they are unlikely
to change just for you, and you'll lose customers if you do anything bad
because of the faulty data.
Is this what you are doing? Using SPF in your VPOP3? (Assuming VPOP3 is
some user's pop3 proxy application)
Don't get me involved ;)
It wasn't my original suggestion..
We can do SPF in our VPOP3, but only on direct incoming SMTP (so header
lines are irrelevant, it just looks at the sender's IP address)
(VPOP3 is a POP3/SMTP/IMAP4 mail server, not a proxy, BTW)
But - we do get requests for SPF support on incoming SMTP via an ISP's
server, or on incoming POP3 mail. At the moment, we're reluctant to do it
because of the problem of knowing exactly which mail server in the trace
headers was the one we should be checking. This could be handled by a
knowledgeable user telling our software which mail server(s) were the
recipients' ISPs - but knowledgeable users are few and far between in our
market (SMEs) so you need to do it automatically, or not at all..
Paul VPOP3 - Internet Email Server/Gateway
support(_at_)pscs(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk http://www.pscs.co.uk/
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, (continued)
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, ned+ietf-smtp
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, Paul Smith
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, Lyndon Nerenberg
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, Paul Smith
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, Bruce Lilly
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, ned+ietf-smtp
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, Frank Ellermann
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, Paul Smith
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, Hector Santos
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again,
Paul Smith <=
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, David MacQuigg
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, Bruce Lilly
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, David MacQuigg
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, Bruce Lilly
- Is it really FUD? [Re: "Header Reordering", yet again], Hector Santos
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, Hector Santos
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, Hector Santos
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, Hector Santos
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: "Header Reordering", yet again, Frank Ellermann
|
|
|