-----Original Message-----
From: owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
[mailto:owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com]On Behalf Of
Jeffrey Goldberg
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 2:51 PM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] bad advice: Please stop publishing -all it is
NOT time yet
On Jun 13, 2004, at 11:10 AM, wayne wrote:
For those who care to test it, I have duplicated Michael's original
situation as userfriendly.midwestcs.com.
Forging that, I have NOT been able to reproduce the problem using
Sendmail 8.12.10
sendmail-milter 1.41
Mail::SPF::Query 1.997
Sendmail::Milter 0.18
Net::DNS 0.47
That is, when I forge incoming with an 2821 From of
<foo(_at_)userfriendly(_dot_)midwestcs(_dot_)com>
I correctly get a "fail".
Transcript (with some snippage and a name change to "somesite")
% telnet mail.somesite.com 25
Trying 12.158.65.14...
Connected to mail.somesite.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 mail.slauson.com ESMTP Sendmail 8.12.10/8.12.10; Mon, 14 Jun 2004
11:46:15 -0700
ehlo userfriendly.midwestcs.com
250-mail.somesite.com Hello jpg.dsl.pe.net [64.38.71.68], pleased to
meet you
250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
250-[more E stuff snipped]
250 HELP
mail from:<foo(_at_)userfriendly(_dot_)midwestcs(_dot_)com>
550 5.7.1 <foo(_at_)userfriendly(_dot_)midwestcs(_dot_)com>... Please see
http://spf.pobox.com/why.html?
sender=foo(_at_)userfriendly(_dot_)midwestcs(_dot_)com&ip=64.38.71.68&receiver=cairo.lila
c.somesite.com
quit
221 2.0.0 mail.somesite.com closing connection
Based on the original post, it appears to me that the original complaint was
against the spamassassin implementation of SPF. It also appears that he is
using an older spamassassin 3.0.0 nightly:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.0-r9952 (2004-04-09)
Looking over what I could find on the spamassassin site, they are using
Mail::SPF::Query. The initial enhancement request was marked fixed on
2003-09-28.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2143
I wonder what version of Mail::SPF::Query is being used. It may even get
more complicated than that... In this bug:
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3335
It turned out a different version of perl (5.8.4) was required.
It would seem to me that it would make sense for the original poster (or
someone else who can) to run the test case against the current spamassassin,
with the current Mail::SPF::Query and see if the problem recurs.
Scott K