...... Original Message .......
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:41:06 -0700 Jonathan Gardner wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 17 September 2004 12:38 pm, Scott Kitterman wrote:
SPF is defined as the Sender Policy. I've defined my sender policy and I
don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to follow it in a spec
compliant way. There has been lots of discussion on this list about how
important it is for senders to have a reliable, consistent understanding
of what the different SPF receive implementations will do. If the
senders can't anticpate the result of a policy, then they won't publish
it.
The receivers don't follow a sender policy. They merely read it and
interpret it.
I do see your point about the need for receivers to behave consistently.
In
this case, the receiver should be rejecting all SPF NONE and SPF UNKNOWN
email just as he rejects SPF NEUTRAL email.
Out of curiosity, who is this receiver and is he on this list? Perhaps we
could hear why he is doing what he is doing?
They are subscribed to the list, but I know they were out of the office
today.
Scott Kitterman
- --
Jonathan M. Gardner
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFBS2gCBFeYcclU5Q0RAq+1AJ41ZLgAro6X0R+nYFUjsw10YwkKlwCgl58h
QBiujrA3keJVw0RoEM0al9c=
=0lTs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
http://www.InboxEvent.com/?s=d --- Inbox Event Nov 17-19 in Atlanta features
SPF and Sender ID.
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com