spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: the "implicit MX" rule

2004-06-21 02:41:28
Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:

 [relays keeping the MAiL FROM of the submitter]
There is very good reason to offer this service.

Yes, it works for you because you added the /24 of
the relays to your sender policy.  There's nothing
wrong with this service if the senders know what 
they are doing and publish a corresponding sender
policy.

Sorry for being long winded, but I don't think 
that the service your ASP provides is so bizarre.

It could be a problem for domains without a sender
policy and without MX under Meng's new no-MX-rule.

But now that I've seen your example this should be
a rare case:  If a small domain sends mail via a
smtp relay (i.e. not a MSA fixing their MAIL FROM),
then they most probably have an MX, and therefore
the no-MX-rule can't cause a FAIL.

If they have only a smtpd (no MX), they could add
a redudant MX record to bypass the no-MX-rule.

And if they have nothing at all the FAIL of the
no-MX-rule would be (more than) appropriate.  In
this rare case the provider of the smtp relay
should explain the problem to his user.  Or Weng
simply adds this as a special case to why.html 

Or the provider of the relay could automatically
enforce the rule:  no MX and no sender policy =>
behave as MSA (= fix MAIL FROM), otherwise relay.

                 Bye, Frank



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