On 10/31/06 9:34 PM, "Scott Kitterman" <scott(_at_)kitterman(_dot_)com> wrote:
On Tuesday 31 October 2006 22:18, Devin Ganger wrote:
Can you be more precise? Are you saying that MS implementations (such as
Exchange) do PRA checks on v=spf1 records instead of MAIL FROM checks, or
are you saying that they do PRA checks on v=spf1 records for Hotmail/MSN?
It's both.
Wow. That's completely in violation of the way MS's own documentation
describes their Sender ID implementation working.
Does anybody have any pointers to constructing a test case that can clearly
demonstrate this? If I have time, I'd love to be able to get a working demo.
Conferences love a good show and tell.
I would VERY much appreciate any comments, clarifications, and advice. I've
already marked away some time this weekend to update the presentation with
the talking points from the SPF vs. Sender ID page.
When do you need comments by?
I need them by Sunday, 05 Nov, so I can finish up the slide deck on Monday.
I'd prefer to get them sooner, of course, so I can internalize, research,
and verify.
Thanks in advance, everyone. I've been a huge advocate of Sender ID
precisely because I believed that it was backwards-compatible with SPF. If
it's not, then I'll be writing, speaking, and blogging about it a lot.
--
Devin L. Ganger Email: deving(_at_)3sharp(_dot_)com
3Sharp LLC Phone: 425.882.1032 x 109
15311 NE 90th Street Cell: 425.239.2575
Redmond, WA 98052 Fax: 425.702.8455
(e)Mail Insecurity: http://blogs.3sharp.com/blog/deving/
-------
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