On Fri, 17 Feb 2006, Frank Ellermann wrote:
many MTAs do CBV with a MAIL FROM of other than <>.
Let them try this with one of their own kind, and they'll CBV
each other until some timeout stops this seriously bad idea.
Unfortunately, my clients do want to receive mail from such
MTAs. Sigh.
Tough. OTOH there's no dead loop if at least one side gets it
right. What do they do if they meet one of their own kind -
play ping-pong until all ports are busy ?
This happens many times every day. It loops 20 or 30 times between
their braindead systems until one of the systems notices "too many hops".
Then they send the whole mess, complete with never-ending received headers,
to postmaster(_at_)oneofmydomains(_dot_)com, because
spammer(_at_)oneofmydomains(_dot_)com
was listed as the alleged sender. I've trained my bayesian filter
to discard all mail to postmaster with lots of Received headers.
If you're interested in some of the guilty parties, I could dig
through the quarantine when I get a chance.
--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis 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