Hector Santos wrote:
SPF-FAIL -> Instant rejection????
SPF-PASS -> Instant rejection????
s/instant rejection/preliminary acceptance/ for PASS.
What is your trust in that result? Lets just assume 80%
Somewhere between 99 and 100. Where 99 allows for "one of
my users arranged his forwarding to me in a way 'incompatible'
with 4408".
Of course it's not really incompatible, it just emulates the
original 821 SMTP "user not local" case. What was the count,
Wayne two, Scott one, I one = four 'pseudo-551' in 30 months
for three users ?
What would it take to see in DKIM in order to make that a
100% trusted result?
DKIM has its own 99% barrier, the rest are Mailman and other
mungers. If you're confident that "ignorant forwarder" and
"ignorant mail list" never overlap you'd get in theory 100%.
How about if we got this?
SPF-FAIL + DKIM+PASS = result? PASS or FAIL?
That's Scott's proposal, op=dkim or similar to signal "don't
reject SPF FAIL before DATA, because there might be a DKIM
PASS" (surviving ignorant forwarders).
It still requires the payload to be transferred,
So publish your HEAD draft... :-)
Frank
-------
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