spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Re: SPF and Google Groups (sending on behalf of)

2008-07-20 08:21:14
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 04:51:12PM +0200, Frank Ellermann wrote:

But it clearly was not

Clearly it isn't as clear as you say it is.

I repeat:

SPF does not do anything with headers, with return-path being
the one and only possible exception.

If an implementation does do anything else with headers, it is doing
so because is doesn't know any better.  And that is because there is
this other protocol, not SPF, which does look at headers.

The user who asked the question has likely never before
heard of SenderID.  Apart from being rude it makes no
sense to send users to "SenderID help" (if that exists)
if their problem is a broken SPF implementation.

1: It is not a broken SPF implementation. It is a broken SenderID
implementation.

2: There's nothing rude about saying: 'Your SPF record is just fine.
The problem has nothing to do with SPF, eventhough the error message
says so.  Please turn to the receiver or to microsoft.'  Especially
not if accompanied by some links, e.g. to 
http://www.openspf.org/SPF_vs_Sender_ID


Anyway, I have made my point and will not continue this conversation.


-------------------------------------------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org
Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com