Meng Weng Wong wrote:
I will aggregate those lists and munge them together into a big whitelist.
Is that something like a centralized "SPF HELO best guess" white list,
like Wayne's "trusted forwarder" list ? For a receiver it would be
interesting to know if the forwarders at least guarantee to reject an
SPF FAIL at their border.
The SenderID users might be interested to know if a genuine PRA FAIL
is rejected by these legacy forwarders, and if they support RFC 4405.
Has anybody implemented RFC 4405 (= responsible submitter) so far, or
can we ignore it as stillborn ?
If a legacy forwarder doesn't reject SPF FAIL, then it most likely
also has no clue about publishing SPF HELO policies for its MTAs,
and the very last chance to get anythng right would be to take the
responsibility for its dubious practise by a DKIM-signature.
If that also fails I don't see the purpose of "white listing" such
clueless and greedy forwarders. "It's not my spam, it's not my
problem, I only forwarded it", this simply _cannot_ work, even if
some receivers wish that it _should_ work.
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/?list_id=735