Greg Connor wrote:
Hector- Thanks for the explanation. I believe a number of other people
on
this list have addressed your concerns more effectively than I could.
The most I could really do is to repeat the statement already made
multiple times: checking HELO is not the design goal of SPF.
--Hector Santos <winserver(_dot_)support(_at_)winserver(_dot_)com> wrote:
Straight from the SPF Draft:
2.2.1 Terms
also...
8.3 Conformance with regard to sending e-mail systems
...
For example: in a transaction with
HELO mx01.example.com
MAIL FROM: <>
an SMTP+SPF receiver will perform an SPF query of the form
mx01.example.com TXT
and expect a result such as
"v=spf1 ptr:example.com -all"
or
"v=spf1 a -all"
You can't have it both ways.
Thanks for your input.
It really LOOKS like we are in total agreement here on our facts, but it
SOUNDS like from your tone that you believe we are disagreeing here.
Did you not agree with the statement "checking HELO is not the design goal
of SPF," or did you not understand it?
Let me know, in case I am missing something obvious.
gregc
--
Greg Connor <gconnor(_at_)nekodojo(_dot_)org>