Re: Protecting more than just the envelope-from

On Friday 17 October 2003 02:18, Meng Weng Wong wrote:

On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 12:59:38AM +0100, Phil White wrote:
| On Thursday 16 October 2003 22:06, Meng Weng Wong wrote:
| > 2)  HELO paypal.com
| >     MAIL FROM:<>
|
| This should not be a SPF 'thing'.
| it is already in rfc2821 §4.1.4

SPF strengthens para 2 making rejection acceptable.


Meng

Sincere apologies. I fired off this comment without thinking about my 
phrasing. In my head at the time was:

Your message 
Message-ID: <20031010213629(_dot_)GY2345(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com>
seemed to suggest that you were thinking of a method to do the verify check 
using PTR records.

But the method you used in your examply is not the method used in rfc2821, 
wich is simple and effective, and is already implemented by some mail admins. 
Additionally, it is not a SPF 'thing' per se *.

On the other hand, if you included in your draft a modification of §4.1.4, 
changing the words 'MUST NOT' to MAY (or even SHOULD), I would be extatically 
happy!

Regards,

Phil.



* by this, I'm thinking that SPF is specifically to verify the sender. HELO 
verification is the step immediately preceding this, and verifies the host 
itself.

-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your 
subscription, 
please go to 
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)½§ÅvÂ¼ð¦¾Øß´ëù1Ií-»Fqx(_dot_)com