On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Julian Mehnle wrote:
record. They also reject email that has no From at all. I'll do
some more experiments.
Thanx for this Stuart. Right on time too. I have been looking for info
on the potential consequences of misuse of spfv1 records for Sender-ID.
Well, until Stuart (or somebody else) provides us with more information,
this can hardly be considered empirical.
Stuart, can you give us some representative examples of the messages that
were falsely rejected (for a naive interpretation of "false")?
Well, whatever they're doing, it isn't Sender-ID. Here is a counterexample:
220-rly-yj06.mx.aol.com ESMTP mail_relay_in-yj6.10; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 09:21:17
-0500
220-America Online (AOL) and its affiliated companies do not
220- authorize the use of its proprietary computers and computer
220- networks to accept, transmit, or distribute unsolicited bulk
220- e-mail sent from the internet. Effective immediately: AOL
220- may no longer accept connections from IP addresses which
220 have no reverse-DNS (PTR record) assigned.
HELO mail.editorialunilit.com
250 rly-yj06.mx.aol.com OK
MAIL FROM: <stuart(_at_)editorialunilit(_dot_)com>
250 OK
RCPT TO: <downsrob(_at_)aol(_dot_)com>
250 OK
DATA
354 START MAIL INPUT, END WITH "." ON A LINE BY ITSELF
Subject: test 3
From: Stuart <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
This is a test of sender ID.
.
250 OK
Both bmsi.com and editorialunilit.com are SPF enabled. I think
it is just a spam filter.
--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flamis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.