On Sat, 27 Jan 2007, Frank Ellermann wrote:
Seth Goodman wrote:
I suggest you refrain from stating that this has anything to do
with the "point of SPF fail". It does not, and it never has.
This is obviously untrue - the very first SPF Web page prominently
talked about "SPF breaking forwarding". It's the intended effect
of SPF FAIL policies to be rejected at the border of the receiver.
Yes, but that does *not* break forwarding when the receiver (who
set up the forwarding in the first place) does SPF checking
*correctly*. Checking SPF for connections from your secondary MX
is stupid and wrong (but that doesn't stop people from doing it). Checking SPF
for connections from your authorized forwarders is stupid and wrong
(but that doesn't stop people from doing it).
Receivers that have no clue who their forwarders are, and don't
want to lose forwarded mail, can't check SPF (or at least can't
reject on SPF) until they get that straightened out, or all their
forwarders use SRS.
An important feature of any SPF checking system is a simple way for
users to list forwarders.
--
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/?list_id=735