spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [spf-discuss] Exclusive v. Open SPF records

2005-09-06 06:19:29
On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 00:25:22 +0100 (BST) Jasper Wallace 
<jasper(_at_)pointless(_dot_)net> wrote:
On Sun, 4 Sep 2005, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:

On Sat, 3 Sep 2005, Gaven Henderson wrote:

So, can somebody explain to me the functional difference between 
neutral and
softfail?  Isn't that like saying "kind of grey" as opposed to "really

SOFTFAIL is for debugging, before switching to -all.  Receivers
are encouraged to send feedback (via DSN) for SOFTFAIL.  When you
get a SOFTFAIL DSN for a legit message, you have just found a bug
in your policy.

Or you've found a forwarder who dosn't do SRS.

If I send an email through a forwarder that dosn't do SRS, and if the
recipient has strict SPF checking, my email will discarded.

So I have ~all instead of -all at the end of my spf record.

When I can be fairly confident that any random recipient I send mail
to will not go thorugh a forwarder that dosn't do SRS, then I can change
to -all.

I've had a -all record on my (small) domains for over a year now and I have 
never gotten a rejection due to forwarding.  It's also only a minute 
fraction of the questions/complaints submitted via the web site.

The significance of the forwarding issue varies a lot depending on the user 
base.  For you, the time may well be now.

Scott K

-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>