Ok, here are some very rough words to give you the idea of what I was
talking about earlier in terms on clarifying the SPF semantics, and
the circumstances when mail should be rejected.
This is fairly rough first cut. It doesn't make any technical changes
to the spec, but it does fix a bug. At the moment, the spec says that
a receiving system SHOULD reject legitimate mail that's been relayed
by a legacy forwarder. IMHO this is a serious problem; the spec
mustn't mandate the bouncing of legitimate mail, and expect
implementors to be smart enough to realize that that was never the
intention. It needs to be spelt out.
--------------------
2. Designating SMTP Clients
Add the following text:
Specifically, SPF records identify the hosts that might make the
initial delivery to one of the recipient's mail exchangers (as
identified in MX or A records). These hosts will typically be under
the administrative control of the sender or their service provider.
Note that publishing SPF records makes no claim about what hosts may
originate SMTP transactions in other circumstances (such as when the
receiving host chooses to forward the message to another host), since
such behaviour is generally outside the administrative control of the
sender's domain.
Definition
Add somewhere:
A legacy forwarder means any system that forwards a message to one or
more destinations without modifying the envelope sender in the MAIL
FROM command. Most existing mail forwarders are legacy forwarders;
some simplistic small-scale distribution lists are also legacy
forwarders.
2.3.2 Result Values and the Default Modifier
Change the descriptions of softdeny and deny as follows:
"Softdeny" means MTAs SHOULD accept the message. The MTA SHOULD
prepend a Received-SPF header with a value of "softdeny", unless the
sender is determined to be a legacy forwarder relaying mail with the
consent of the receiving party (in which case it should do what???)
"Deny" means MTAs SHOULD reject the message using a 550 permanent
failure reply code, unless the sender is determined to be a legacy
forwarder relaying mail with the consent of the receiving party.
Add at the end of 2.3.2
It is assumed that receiving systems will generally e aware of any
legacy forwarders that forward mail to them. Where a receiving system
has consented to such a forwarder relaying mail to them, such mail
SHOULD NOT be rejected.
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡