In <0B85B2E3-5137-11D8-BE87-000393BF216A(_at_)mbarr(_dot_)net> Matthew Barr
<mbarr(_at_)mbarr(_dot_)net> writes:
However, Unknown means that you really just messed up
the record, in the end. I think it's effectively equivalent to not
having the SPF header, in some ways.
Unknown is supposed to be treated exactly the same as if you didn't
have an SPF record. Domain owners must be able to test the water with
no downside. They can say "yes, this *is* a good email source, the
rest I'm not sure about." It also lets domain owners add logging type
exists: mechanisms.
What *would* be nice is some way for the domain controller to tell how
much email from their domain is softfailing.
Add a logging type exists: mechanism right before the ~all.
server choice. Is it possible with the patches to do a soft bounce,
similar to the message when you can't reach a machine for 4 hrs? I
think that might be the only way to get the info back to the
sysadmins.
I think this is the idea of the report= modifier. I confess I haven't
followed the status of that very closely.
Does any of what I've said really make sense?
Yep, it makes sense.
-wayne
-------
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_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡