On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 12:57:54PM +0000, Mark wrote:
Oh? That is quite a new interpretation. In my understanding of SPF, in the
above case, an SPF lookup should ONLY be done on
"au01.mta.mycompany.myisp.au.com". Certainly no traversing "up" the tree, to
try and find other SPF records. The SPF record for "somebody.example.com"
may be entirely different from "example.com" itself, or even be totally
absent. And that is intentional.
Yes, I wasn't trying to imply that this is something and SPF processor
would be expected to do at this point. I don't recall seeing this
discussed before.
If "somebody.example.com" has its own SPF record, then use that. But if
not, and there is no SOA for "somebody.example.com", then step back one
level and look for an SPF record at "example.com". If there is one
present, use that. If not, and there is an SOA record at "example.com",
then stop looking for more SPF records.
This idea was prompted by noticing this morning that "buy.com"
publishes an SPF record, but correspondence with their customer service
department comes from "customerservice.buy.com" which has no SPF record
at all.
Greg Hewgill
http://hewgill.com
-------
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
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature