spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [spf-discuss] Empty MX name

2005-12-29 09:05:19
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005, Theo Schlossnagle wrote:

The purpose of telling the world that you _do not_ recieve mail is that 
they can outright reject any mail from that domain.  The purpose of the 
NULL MX is to tell the world that domain is not used for email.  It's 
like an spf -all record, except isn't accompanied by the contraversy 
that surrounds SPF.

So when an SPF evaluator encounters an MX mechanism with a NULL MX,
should it return permerror, or simply fail to match?  Consider:

foo.com IN TXT "v=spf1 mx:bar.com"
bar.com IN MX 0 .

Just because bar.com doesn't accept (and therefore doesn't send either)
doesn't mean that foo.com doesn't accept or send.

While it is very likely that foo.com made a booboo with their SPF record,
another mechanism might match, and the mistake doesn't make the result
ambiguous.

For pyspf, how about returning permerror in super strict mode (used for
Scott Kitterman's SPF validator web page), but failing to match in lenient or
compliant mode?

-- 
              Stuart D. Gathman <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
    Business Management Systems Inc.  Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flamis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.

-------
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

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