On Wed, 2004-10-27 at 18:13 -0400, Meng Weng Wong wrote:
On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 10:06:56PM +0200, Koen Martens wrote:
|
| It sort of depends. Now that microsoft is using v=spf1 to do PRA
| checking if no spf2.0/pra record is present, you might get into trouble
| if your v=spf1 record does not cover the PRA stuff. There is however a
| simple solution: just publish "spf2.0/pra ?all" next to your v=spf1
| record, this will simply make sure pra is not applied to your domain.
|
| Of course, the less simple solution is to make sure that your v=spf1 record
| also works for PRA.
|
I see it as MS's responsibility to ensure that PRA works
well. It looks to me like Outlook and Hotmail are committed
to implementing it, so MS will have to figure out the
workarounds for any bugs in the PRA algorithm. I don't know
of any MTA vendors who are implementing PRA checking at this
time. Which kinda makes sense, because PRA is for MUAs, and
MUAs are ... mostly Outlook. 2821.mail-from is for MTAs,
and they're quite happy with SPF Classic.
SPF Classic / Mail-From, MTA, opensource, unix
Caller ID / PRA, MUA, commercial, Microsoft
spot the trend?
Fortunately with the merged Sender ID, we are free to do
SPF Classic and MS is free to do PRA and both are free to
say we're doing Sender ID. And that removes industry
confusion. Enough to move forward, at least.
I'm sorry I would rather tolerate further flagrant abuse of the SMTP
protocol through forgery and phishing then to contribute further to
something Microsoft's FUD machine is claiming to be something they came
up with.
It does not remove industry confusion in my opinion. All it does is
piss the living shit out of me, and allow MS to take the credit. Its
just not worth it. Its not worth it because SenderID is a piece of
crap. Its title is tainted by their very presence. I shall never use
it, and I recommend that everyone else here drop the use of this title
also.
Hi Meng, and welcome to the SPF-DISCUSS list. SPF stands for Sender
Policy Framework and is an OPEN working group free of financial
motivation or obligation. This working group has submitted a Draft to
the IETF and aims to further its work in the area of furthering this
standard to present a PATENT FREE, ROYALTY FREE, XML FREE, SCANDAL FREE
technology to the world.
Cheers,
James
--
James Couzens,
Programmer
^ ( ( (
((__)) __\|/__ __|+|__ '. ___ .'
(00) (o o) (0~0) ' (> <) '
---nn-(o__o)-nn---ooO--(_)--Ooo--ooO--(_)--Ooo---ooO--(_)--Ooo---
http://libspf.org -- ANSI C Sender Policy Framework library
http://libsrs.org -- ANSI C Sender Rewriting Scheme library
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PGP: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x7A7C7DCF
-------
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
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part