-----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 David
Woodhouse
Sent: maandag 22 november 2004 14:24
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: RE: [spf-discuss] Sendmail white paper
On Mon, 2004-11-22 at 12:51 +0000, Mark wrote:
If it had an SPF "fail" when I first received it, I will not forward
it either, of course.
So you throw away mail which is potentially valid, which may have been
forwarded by a forwarder which doesn't do SRS.
When you put it like that, it sounds like it is "my" decision; but it is
really that of the domain owner. I take it an admin who adds "-all" SPF
records is sufficiently confident about the manner in which mail for his
domain is going to be relayed. Those considerations, and ensuing decision
about his SPF record, lies squarely with him. If he is not certain of
things, he should not ask me to "fail" then. But if he does, I do.
What about incoming mail with SPF 'unknown'? Do you do SRS on that?
Yes.
There's usually absolutely no need for you to do so -- if you
forward it intact, it's likely to still be 'unknown'.
"pass", "fail", "neutral", etc, these pertain to the legitimay of the
relay. When something comes in with "neutral", then it only means that the
relay used says "neutral". When I, in turn, relay, as part of a forward
operation, then it becomes *my* relay, with my SPF records.
- Mark
System Administrator Asarian-host.org
---
"If you were supposed to understand it,
we wouldn't call it code." - FedEx