-----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
Hallam-Baker,
Phillip
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 11:47 AM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: RE: [spf-discuss] Abusing SPF record for PRA testing
If the SPF council starts sending out idiotic messages like
this then it is
finished.
Thank you PHB for your polite and diplomatic statement of your opinion.
There is no legal or moral authority behind the demand.
demand != suggestion
recall:
Perhaps a representative from the SPF council should contact
Perhaps you would follow this link to clarify for yourself the meaning of
"perhaps"
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=perhaps
The objective here is to stop spam.
No, its not. The objective is authentication (AKA forgery prevention), which
for now (until the
spammers catch up) may have an effect on some types of spam. But in itself SPF
is not the FUSSP.
Please try to stay focused on the actual goal of SPF, it will make discussion
easier if everyone is
talking about the same thing.
The world does not care about your
piffling and irrelevant vendetta against Microsoft.
Um, I didn't say anything about Microsoft. Indeed, nobody did until you.
AFAIK Microsoft has not
released a new version of Exchange that checks PRA, so it must be someone
else's MTA that I am
performing a "vendetta" against.
And in case it comes up, and for your reference, a protocol is not an MTA. An
MTA uses protocols.
And it is the PRA protocol which is of concern. So even when Exchange does
implement PRA, it will
be the PRA protocol using SPF records that would be of concern.
The Apache lawyer who objected to the Sender-Id license
agreed to the exact
same term in the W3C patent negotiations, he seems to have
decided to use
MARID and the IETF as an opportunity to reopen the debate in
the IETF and go
for more.
This seems to be completely off topic. Please try to stick to the topic at
hand. I realize this
may be confusing, (especially if people do not stay on topic) but if you would
like to discuss
something else, kindly start another thread.
Its not just engineers who get wedged on their own pet projects.
I am sorry, I do not understand. If this is on topic, please clarify.
Thanks
Terry Fielder
-----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
terry(_at_)ashtonwoodshomes(_dot_)com
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 11:38 AM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: RE: [spf-discuss] Abusing SPF record for PRA testing
Perhaps a representative from the SPF council should contact
postmaster(_at_)algoritmnt(_dot_)ru indicating that PRA interpreting SPF
records is unacceptable, with the illustration of this
particular failure as being why.
A proposed response that the SPF council rep could use follows:
To Whom It May Concern
<snip the proposed memo>
Terry Fielder
Manager Software Development and Deployment
Great Gulf Homes / Ashton Woods Homes
terry(_at_)greatgulfhomes(_dot_)com
Fax: (416) 441-9085
-----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
Roger Moser
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 7:13 AM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: [spf-discuss] Abusing SPF record for PRA testing
Just for your information:
mail.algoritmnt.ru abuses the SPF record to test the PRA
and rejected
a mail from my server by saying "550 5.7.0 Caller-ID for
the message
does not match" because the "From:" domain was not my
domain and the
domain owner
publishes "~all". Only after I added a Sender header with my
domain, it has
been accepted.
Roger
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Read the whitepaper! http://spf.pobox.com/whitepaper.pdf
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
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Read the whitepaper! http://spf.pobox.com/whitepaper.pdf
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
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Read the whitepaper! http://spf.pobox.com/whitepaper.pdf
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