spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [spf-discuss] Re: SPF adoption statistics

2005-11-23 17:22:16

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex van den Bogaerdt" <alex(_at_)ergens(_dot_)op(_dot_)het(_dot_)net>

      5.2.5  HELO Command: RFC-821 Section 3.5

         The sender-SMTP MUST ensure that the <domain> parameter in a
         HELO command is a valid principal host domain name for the
         client host.  As a result, the receiver-SMTP will not have to
         perform MX resolution on this name in order to validate the
         HELO parameter.

         The HELO receiver MAY verify that the HELO parameter really
         corresponds to the IP address of the sender.  However, the
         receiver MUST NOT refuse to accept a message, even if the
         sender's HELO command fails verification.

How more explicit can it get?  it says "MUST NOT"  not "SHOULD NOT"

Yes it does.  It also specifies a clear boundary for which this
MUST NOT is valid.  You have just shown an example that does not
help your case.

I am not going to repeat the rest.  If you are still ignorant after
a gazillion posts about this, you will still be ignorant after a
gazillion plus one.

Yes: I used the word ignorant.  Be glad, I could also have used obstinate.

Attacking me is not going to excuse your moronic behavior. It clearly says
"MUST NOT" reject.

Please show where "MUST NOT" is relaxed to:

    "SHOULD NOT"
    "MAY NOT"
    "SHOULD CONSIDER NOT"
    "ITS UP TO YOU"
    "ROLL A DICE"
    "SPF PEOPLE ARE THE EXCEPTION"
    "ONLY IF SENDER IS USING WINDOWS"
    "OH LOOK, I USE UNIX. I MUST BE GEEK! THEREFORE I CAN"

If the GAZILLION POST+2 here is all about IGNORING SPECIFICATION, INCLUDING
ITS OWN, then there should be no surprise for the SPF PR and utterly slow
acceptance with thorns on its side problems.

You're wrong and you know it. Attacking me just shows how narrow-minded you
are. Be glad, I could of use moron.

What else?

Geez, I provide a historical reason for why HELO A matching is unreliable
and it is WRITTEN in STONE that its a MUST NOT reject item, and the
ADMINISTRATOR here get all pissed off!!  Hell, do what you want. Its your
system.  But don't expect that to be the status quo because it isn't.

--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.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