On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 02:27:30PM -0400, Hector Santos wrote:
I was not referring to your record, but now in general.
A slightly simplified approach:
Just process the record left to right.
Why would I use APL logic (right to left) when the protocol says otherwise?
You process a record wrong. You ask for help. You get help, why
do you become sarcastic?
You cannot be sure mail from those machines is really
sent by Scott but you can be sure other mail is not
sent by Scott. Do not mistake "?" for anything negative.
I know what ? means Alex.
Then don't say other things. Either you don't know what it really
means or you are deliberately spreading fud. Which is it?
I don't think you followed my logic here.
Oh but I did. I just don't agree with it.
I have no interest in "you" (speaking in general) telling me that "you might
or not" be a "good guy" because to me, that means you are not trust worthy at
any level. It puts the burden on the receiver to do more work anyway using
In other words:
PASS - ACCEPT
FAIL - REJECT
OTHER - MORE WORK
That's just not true. A neutral result means nothing changed when
compared by before-SPF times. There's not more work to do. It is
just that there is not less work to do. And yes, that's different.
The rest of your post did, again, talk about something else than SPF.
I suggest you have a look at the exact definitions in the RFC before
you continue debugging your program and/or discussing that other
protocol that looks remarkably like SPF and even shares its name.