On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 09:23:29AM -0600, wayne wrote:
If you don't forward messages, you don't have a problem. There are
actually a lot of places that don't.
In <20040219170644(_dot_)GG26033(_at_)csi(_dot_)hu>
mw-list-spf-discuss(_at_)csi(_dot_)hu writes:
Those places cannot implement SPF, because SPF breaks bouncehandling
(have not we said this before):
--wayne <wayne(_at_)midwestcs(_dot_)com> wrote:
Yes, those places *can* implement SPF. Many already have.
I am a user at an ISP that has SPF but no SRS, and no forwarding
allowed.
If the ISP does no forwarding, then the ISP doesn't have to use SRS.
I send a message to a friend who forwards it to his new
account. The forwarding is done without SRS, so if the message
bounces from my friend's new account, it will bounce directly to my
account.
I agree with Wayne's response, but it may not be 100% clear. Your original
point is that SRS is needed if SPF is used. Not exactly true, as has been
explained, but there is a relationship. Specifically, if OTHERS implement
SPF, and YOU forward mail, then YOU have to make some workaround, whether
you have chosen to implement SPF yourself or not. (That can be to ask your
forward-to people to whitelist you, or rewrite using SRS, or rewrite all
senders the same so bounces go to postmaster, or whatever you want)
In other words, forwarders are a third party who are affected by senders
and receivers who implement SPF. Is this the point you are getting at?
--
Greg Connor <gconnor(_at_)nekodojo(_dot_)org>