On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 15:49 -0500, terry(_at_)ashtonwoodshomes(_dot_)com wrote:
5. Because I think the PRA algorithm can be improved, I'd change
the beginning of this section to "The current PRA algorithm",
It's also not fair to complain that it drops mail with an
unauthorized Sender:, since that's its *purpose*. It would
be just as wrong to complain that spf drops mail with an
unauthorized MAIL FROM.
NO: SPF does not DROP email, it REJECTS it (big difference, with SPF sender
finds out their email
was not delivered. A sender of a DROPPED email may never find out
automatically the message was not
received)
To be perfectly honest, if you are even REJECTING email purely based on
an SPF result, you are a gambling man. What might be working for you
this very money will come back to haunt you, and the chances of this
occurring grow significantly greater with every passing day.
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