spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Re: clamav plugin?

2004-01-30 08:50:36
In <009b01c3e745$d21e32e0$cec8d684(_at_)sraq(_dot_)intra> "Guillaume Filion" 
<gfk(_at_)logidac(_dot_)com> writes:

Yes, of course ClamAV needs to be fixed. My point was if there was a lot of
other programs that were broken like ClamAV is, then is might be easier to
change SPF rather than all the broken programs. [...]

At this stage of the game, I think it is important to at least consider
changing the format of the Received-SPF: headers.  I suspect that with
so few MTAs actually checking and generating these headers, that
running into a program that breaks because of them may indicate that
there are a lot of such programs.

Of course, there may also be programs that break if we switch to
Received: headers with the SPF keyword.  (SpamCop?  SpamAssassin?)


So, what are the advantages of using "Received-SPF:" compared with
"Received: SPF"?


-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-02.9.5.txt
Wiki: http://spfwiki.infinitepenguins.net/pmwiki.php/SenderPermittedFrom/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your 
subscription, 
please go to 
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>