Julian Mehnle wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
mail.globalinkllc.com has no SPF record. However, their weird MX could
happen to a domain that does.
$ host -t mx mail.globalinkllc.com
mail.globalinkllc.com is an alias for redirect.mail.premiumservices.
yahoo.com. redirect.mail.premiumservices.yahoo.com is an alias for
ymb1.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com. ymb1.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com mail is handled
by 0 .
Currently, pyspf gets temperror for an MX mechanism and an MX record
with an empty name like the above.
What should the correct result be? Should the mechanism simply fail
to match? Or permerror?
mail.globalinkllc.com. 600 IN CNAME
redirect.mail.premiumservices.yahoo.com.
redirect.mail.premiumservices.yahoo.com. 6004 IN CNAME
ymb1.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com.
ymb1.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com. 1800 IN MX 0 .
I think it should yield a PermError.
Legalistic reason: "MX 0 ." is illegal because "." is not a valid FQDN, at
least not for what is generally considered an FQDN by the SPF
specification.
Yahoo believes that a "NULL MX" means the following:
http://ietfreport.isoc.org/idref/draft-delany-nullmx/
I'd tend to agree.
--
// Theo Schlossnagle
// Principal Engineer -- http://www.omniti.com/~jesus/
// Ecelerity: Run with it. -- http://www.omniti.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