Hello!
On Fri, Nov 26, 2004 at 04:27:54PM -0000, Richard Bang wrote:
[...]
Receivers should implement:
?all - Treat mail with extreme caution
~all - Treat mail with caution
-all - Reject out of hand.
Huh, did you reverse the order of ? and ~?
Shouldn't it be this instead:
?all - Treat mail with some caution
~all - Treat mail with much caution
-all - Reject
[...]
Forwarders:
Forward mail correctly
Where is it really defined that .forward style forwarding w/o envelope
rewriting is *not* correct (best some RFC source)?
or accept that you will get flak because you are not
SPF friendly. Don't whine about cost because the cost of SPAM far outweighs
any niggles you might have about fixing your legacy system. Play ball.
Why should SPF impose effort on non-SPF sites instead of do the effort
themselves (e.g. by adding something like SES into the mix, which yields
you forged bounce protection in addition, anyway)?
The rules have changed, play by the new rules or leave the game.
They haven't, at least not yet (they would only if the SMTP RFCs would
be obsoleted or updated to indicate that forwarding w/o rewriting the
envelope MUST NOT be done).
Kind regards,
Hannah.