Todd Vierling <tv+spf(_at_)duh(_dot_)org> wrote:
Sender: != return path (envelope). Please do not equate them, or
even cosider them to be related; they're not.
Why not?
Well, you didn't finish the detailed explanation. Here goes:
B. Pobox user *receives from* mailing list
1. Other subscriber sends to mailing list:
MAIL FROM: other(_at_)subscriber(_dot_)tld
( Sender: would be the same as From:, so not included )
From: other(_at_)subscriber(_dot_)tld
To: mailing(_at_)list(_dot_)tld
2. Mailing list forwards to Pobox user:
MAIL FROM: mailing(_at_)list(_dot_)tld (or SRS equivalent)
Sender: mailing(_at_)list(_dot_)tld (or SRS equivalent)
From: other(_at_)subscriber(_dot_)tld
To: user(_at_)pobox(_dot_)com
You missed the next step.
3. Pobox rewrites envelope to be SPF compliant and relays to next
address.
MAIL FROM: mailing(_at_)���D ��,��bQ1&�^���
(RCPT TO: poboxuser(_at_)someotherdomain(_dot_)tld)
Sender: mailing(_at_)list(_dot_)tld
From: other(_at_)subscriber(_dot_)tld
To: user(_at_)pobox(_dot_)com
No match on headers. This would be flagged as bad by the
envelope-to-header check.
Thanks, I indeed missed the next step:
3. Pobox forwards to Pobox user's real address:
MAIL FROM: mailing(_at_)���D ��,��bQ1&�^���
RCPT TO: poboxuser(_at_)someotherdomain(_dot_)tld
Sender: mailing(_at_)���D ��,��bQ1&�^���
From: other(_at_)subscriber(_dot_)tld
To: user(_at_)pobox(_dot_)com
Nowhere did I suggest doing an "envelope-to-header check". This is of course
non-sense. What I suggested was putting the envelope sender into the "Sender:"
header when forwarding (as opposed to relaying). What's wrong with that?
-------
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-02.9.4.txt
Wiki:
http://spfwiki.infinitepenguins.net/pmwiki.php/SenderPermittedFrom/HomePage
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)���v¼����ߴ� �1I�-�Fqx(_dot_)com