Le 04-01-30, à 11:54, Julian Mehnle a écrit :
Guillaume Filion [gfk(_at_)logidac(_dot_)com] wrote:
"Julian Mehnle" <lists(_at_)mehnle(_dot_)net> wrote:
So, what are the advantages of using "Received-SPF:" compared with
"Received: SPF"?
It's standards compliant. We should not get incompliant just to
accommodate broken programs, no way!
Check the RFCs (or http://cr.yp.to/immhf.html which is a bit more
readable). "Received: SPF" *is* standard compliant.
Where does it say that? On [1] it says the minimum "Received:" record
would contain:
7. a semicolon; and
8. a timestamp
"SPF" doesn't match any of the other things (1. through 6.).
[1] http://cr.yp.to/immhf/envelope.html
1 to 6 are all optionnal, only 7 and 8 are mandatory. "Received: SPF"
is compliant with that. I admit that I should have said that "Received:
SPF" header is not forbidden by the RFC rather than saying it is RFC
compliant.
Anyway, it seems that the ClamAV problem is more complex than just the
SPF header, so it's more believable that this misbehavior is not found
in a lot of other programs.
Anyway, I'm leaving for one week for the hot sun of Dominican Republic
and I won't be reachable by email.
See you in one week,
GFK's
--
Guillaume Filion, ing. jr
Logidac Tech., Beaumont, Québec, Canada - http://logidac.com/
PGP Key and more: http://guillaume.filion.org/
-------
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_)½§Åv¼ð¦¾Øß´ë ù1Ií-»Fqx(_dot_)com