Hector Santos writes:
From: "Mark" <admin(_at_)asarian-host(_dot_)net>
I have personally never found cause to enable 'best-guess'. But it is in
the nature of receiver policy (the "Your MTA, you rules" adage) that
receivers can accept pretty much all mail they want.
Thats fine, but a standard SPF implementations will not understands this
false PASS notification. It knows nothing about this BEST GUESS because it
is not expecting it. However, it will know a NONE was the REAL result. It
wasn't a PASS.
Right here is the essence of what the shouting is about. Mark lives
in the real world where SPF policies say what senders would like
reeivers to do, but receivers aren't under any obligation to do it
that way. Meanwhile, Hector is stuck trying to design email software
for users of arbitrary receivers, so he wants all receivers using SPF
policies to be the same. I think that's highly unrealistic and that a
BCP rfc is probably the most Hector can expect, and even that will
take a few years of wringing out.
--
Dick St.Peters, stpeters(_at_)NetHeaven(_dot_)com
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
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