Scott Kitterman wrote:
Arjen de Korte wrote:
In my opinion the CallerID code is obsolete, so this could be removed
from the code.
Stuart and I removed the equivalent code from pySPF over the summer for
that reason.
Hmm, and did you get any complaints about the removed "feature"?
None. The CallerID feature in Mail::SPF::Query was implemented as a
fallback mechanism in case a domain had not published an SPF record. This
was only done if the domain was either (*.)microsoft.com or
(*.)hotmail.com. Since both Microsoft and Hotmail publish an SPF record,
the CallerID records will no longer be used by Mail::SPF::Query.
As a side note, Hotmail has effectively pulled its '_ep.hotmail.com'
record (it references non-existing records), so that leaves only the
Microsoft CallerID record to query (although I doubt it is still being
maintained now that they have officially moved to SenderID).
I guess the real question is, what would removing C-ID support from the
next (and probably last, forever) release of M:S:Q _gain_ us, or anyone
else for that matter?
We (the SPF crowd) argue that SenderID is abusing SPF records. Yet at our
turn we also abuse CallerID records for SPF checks. And since there no
longer is anything to gain with supporting this ancient code, why not
remove it. CallerID (and SenderID) are not SPF and as such don't belong in
a reference implementation.
Arjen
-------
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