RE: 6.74% of domains have SPF, ~35% of e-mails have SPF

6.74%

Hi, looking for an excuse to test that this list again works for
readers on <http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.deployment>
I've found this interesting article:

http://www.usrlocal.com/stories.phtml?sid=1716&from=rss

Frank

-------------------------------------------
  Manage your SPF list subscriptions at http://www.openspf.org/Forums
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Welcome to spf-deployment

You have been subscribed to spf-deployment with the address

  ngomssd-spf-deployment-1 <at> m.gmane.org

This mailing list is for anyone involved in the email industry,
whether as a vendor, service provider, or other element in the
ecosystem, to coordinate on rough dates for industry adoption
of SPF and SenderID.

The archive of past messages is available at
  http://archives.listbox.com/spf-deployment/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
                          List Instructions

To send a message to the list:

    Send an email message to spf-deployment <at> v2.listbox.com

To unsubscribe (leave the list):

    http://v2.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?id=6959931-54f4f02b-ewvqbh9c

To change your subscription settings:

    http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959931&user_secret=54f4f02b

At that page, you can

 1) change your subscribed email address
 2) temporarily suspend list messages
 3) view list archives (if available)
 4) update other account settings

To avoid messages from spf-deployment getting blocked by your spam filters
in the future, please add owner-spf-deployment <at> v2.listbox.com to your Address Book.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

BIND 9.4.0 with support for the SPF RR type has been released

Hi all,

BIND 9.4 has been released.  This is the first non-beta release that 
directly supports the SPF RR type (code 99).  And, no, they aren't 
mentioning this fact anywhere except for deep down in the CHANGES file.

(Unfortunately, they are also still shipping draft-schlitt-spf-classic- 
02.txt instead of rfc4408.txt in their source tarballs.  I bugged them 
multiple times during the 9.4 beta cycles but it seems they ignored me.)

----------  Forwarded Message  ----------
Subject: BIND 9.4.0 is now available.
Date: Saturday, 24. February 2007 02:02
From: Mark Andrews <Mark_Andrews <at> isc.org>
To: bind-announce <at> isc.org

		BIND 9.4.0 is now available.

	BIND 9.4.0 is a feature release for BIND 9.

[...]

BIND 9.4.0 can be downloaded from

        ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/bind-9.4.0.tar.gz

The PGP signature of the distribution is at

        ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/bind-9.4.0.tar.gz.asc
        ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/bind-9.4.0.tar.gz.sha256.asc
        ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/bind-9.4.0.tar.gz.sha512.asc

The signature was generated with the ISC public key, which is
available at <http://www.isc.org/about/openpgp/pgpkey2006.txt>.

A binary kit for Windows NT 4.0 is at

	ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/BIND9.4.0.nt4.zip
	ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/BIND9.4.0.nt4.debug.zip

The PGP signature of the binary kit for Windows NT 4.0 is at

	ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/BIND9.4.0.nt4.zip.asc
	ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/BIND9.4.0.nt4.zip.sha256.asc
	ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/BIND9.4.0.nt4.zip.sha512.asc
	ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/BIND9.4.0.nt4.debug.zip.asc
	ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/BIND9.4.0.nt4.debug.zip.sha256.asc
	ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/BIND9.4.0.nt4.debug.zip.sha512.asc

Note: BIND 9.4.0 will be the last binary release for Windows NT 4.0.

A binary kit for Windows 2000, Windows XP and Window 2003 is at

	ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/BIND9.4.0.zip
	ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/BIND9.4.0.debug.zip

The PGP signature of the binary kit for Windows 2000, Windows XP and
Window 2003 is at

	ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/BIND9.4.0.zip.asc
	ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/BIND9.4.0.zip.sha256.asc
	ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/BIND9.4.0.zip.sha512.asc
	ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/BIND9.4.0.debug.zip.asc
	ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/BIND9.4.0.debug.zip.sha256.asc
	ftp://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.4.0/BIND9.4.0.debug.zip.sha512.asc

[...]

The 2007 SPF Council Elections

HTML: http://www.openspf.org/Council_Election/2007-01

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2007 SPF Council Elections
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

In late 2004, the community of the SPF Project decided that a more
organized, cohesive approach would be needed in order to fight e-mail
identity forgery and other e-mail abuse.  Thus, the SPF Council body was
created and elected in December 2004[1].  For the first time, five council
members were chosen to lead the project.

Now in 2007, two years after the council's formation, the SPF Project goes
on to elect its third council[2].  Again, five council members will lead
the project over the next twelve months to solidify the SPF standard and
continue the battle against e-mail sender forgery according to the visions
of the project's community.

According to the council election procedures[3], this year's election
process starts on 2007-01-08.  Everyone will be eligible to vote in the
election who is subscribed to the spf-discuss mailing list[4] at that
time.  So if you would like to participate in the 2007 council elections,
please make sure that you are subscribed to that mailing list by Monday
2007-01-08 00:00 UTC[5].

Nominations for council membership should be submitted to the spf-discuss
mailing list before 2007-01-15.  Also before that date, the sitting
council will appoint a neutral election officer who will conduct the
election and certify the results.

This will be the schedule of the 2007 council elections:

   Date                     Action/Phase
  ------------------------------------------------------------------
   Mon 01-08 .. Sun 01-14   Appoint Election Officer, Nomination
   Mon 01-08 .. Sun 01-21   Acceptance, Discussion, Registration
   Mon 01-22 .. Sun 01-28   Voting
   Mon 01-29 .. Wed 01-31   Dispute
   Mon 01-29 .. Sun 02-04   Dispute Resolution
   Mon 02-05                Start of new Council Term

Please direct your questions and comments at the spf-discuss mailing
list[4].

Julian,
for the SPF Council.

References:
 1. http://www.openspf.org/Press_Release/2004-12-22
 2. http://www.openspf.org/Council_Election/2007-01
 3. http://www.openspf.org/Council_Election
 4. http://www.openspf.org/Forums
 5. http://www.timeanddate.com/counters/customcounter.html?month=1&day=8&year=2007&hour=0&min=0&sec=0&p0=0

Hotmail and Received-SPF Header

I reported to Hotmail in January that hotmail (when viewing headers in 
hotmail) that it showed Received-SPF headers as just Received: Yes I know 
its cosmetic, buts it would be nice if they could get it fixed. I got a 
response in Janurary saying they would pass this on to their technical 
people but nothing 

ie see copy of header below. Does anyone have any contacts with hotmail 
technical people so this can gets this fixed this century?

Thanks
Craig

----------
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: from mx5.orcon.net.nz ([219.88.242.3]) by 
bay0-mc1-f11.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2444); Sat, 7 
Oct 2006 04:05:53 -0700
Received: from Debian-exim by mx5.orcon.net.nz with local (Exim 
4.63)(envelope-from <lennon <at> voyager.co.nz>)id 1GWA03-0004ZX-FZfor 
lennonnz <at> hotmail.com; Sun, 08 Oct 2006 00:05:47 +1300
Received: none (mx5.orcon.net.nz: domain of lennon <at> voyager.co.nz does not 
designate permitted sender hosts)
Received: from [60.234.13.222] (helo=terminal)by mx5.orcon.net.nz with 
esmtpa (Exim 4.63)(envelope-from <lennon <at> voyager.co.nz>)id 
1GWA03-0004ZL-9zfor lennonnz <at> hotmail.com; Sun, 08 Oct 2006 00:05:47 +1300
X-Message-Info: LsUYwwHHNt3iEJmdlsQymiTkjuj3UmKsc88MqYtw5B0=
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.2663
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2757
X-DSPAM-Check: by mx5.orcon.net.nz on Sun, 08 Oct 2006 00:05:47 +1300
X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent
X-DSPAM-Processed: Sun Oct 8 00:05:47 2006
X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.5276
X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 113 chance of being spam
X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000
Return-Path: prvs=lennon/0435a1a517 <at> voyager.co.nz
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Oct 2006 11:05:54.0401 (UTC) 
FILETIME=[8ED74510:01C6EA00] 

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, 
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-devel <at> v2.listbox.com

The 2006 SPF Council Elections

HTML: http://new.openspf.org/Council_Election/2006-01

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2006 SPF Council Elections
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

In late 2004, the community of the SPF Project decided that a more 
organized, cohesive approach would be needed in order to fight e-mail 
identity forgery and other e-mail abuse.  Thus, the SPF Council body was 
created and elected in December 2004[1].  Five council members were 
chosen[2] to lead the project over the following months:  Mark Kramer 
(Leiden, Netherlands), Chuck Mead (Cary, NC, USA), Julian Mehnle (Munich, 
Germany), Wayne Schlitt (Lincoln, NE, USA), and project founder Meng Weng 
Wong (Philadelphia, PA, USA).  In mid-2005, Chuck Mead left the council 
and Greg Connor (San Jose, CA, USA) took the open seat.

Now in 2006, one year after the council's formation, the SPF Project goes 
on to elect its second council[3].  Again, five council members will lead 
the project over the next twelve months to solidify the SPF standard and 
continue the battle against e-mail sender forgery according to the visions 
of the project's community.

According to the council election procedures that were passed just 
today[4], this year's election process starts today, on Monday 2006-01-02 
at 00:00 UTC.  Everyone is eligible to vote in the election who is 
subscribed to the spf-discuss mailing list.  As a one-time deviation from 
the formal procedures, due to tightness of schedule the eligibility key 
date will be postponed by one week.

So if you would like to participate in the 2006 council elections, please 
make sure that you are subscribed to the spf-discuss mailing list[5] by 
Monday, 2006-01-09, 00:00 UTC.

Nominations for council membership can be submitted to the spf-discuss 
mailing list before the same day.  Also before coming Monday, the sitting 
council will appoint a neutral election officer who will conduct the 
election and certify the results.

This will be the schedule of the 2006 council elections:

   Date                     Action/Phase
  ------------------------------------------------------------------
   Mon 01-02 .. Sun 01-08   Appoint Election Officer, Nomination
   Mon 01-02 .. Sun 01-15   Acceptance, Discussion
   Mon 01-09 .. Sun 01-15   Registration
   Mon 01-16 .. Sun 01-22   Voting
   Mon 01-23 .. Wed 01-25   Dispute
   Mon 01-23 .. Sun 01-29   Dispute Resolution
   Mon 01-30                Start of new Council Term

Please direct your questions and comments at the spf-discuss mailing list.

Julian Mehnle,
SPF Council Secretary.

References:
 1. http://new.openspf.org/Press_Release/2004-12-22
 2. http://new.openspf.org/Council_Election/2004-11
 3. http://new.openspf.org/Council_Election/2006-01
 4. http://new.openspf.org/Council_Election
 5. http://www.openspf.org/mailinglist.html

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, 
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-deployment <at> v2.listbox.com

RE: SPF and ISP's restricting SMTP traffic ??'s

Thanks to all for your input. 

Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew.van.Eerde <at> hbinc.com [mailto:Matthew.van.Eerde <at> hbinc.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 5:53 PM
To: spf-deployment <at> v2.listbox.com
Subject: RE: [spf-deployment] SPF and ISP's restricting SMTP traffic
??'s

Tom Fleischmann wrote:
> A few users, for various reasons, must use a non-VPN POP3 client.
> They are also connected through an ISP that requires outgoing mail to
> be sent via their SMTP server and block attempts tp do otherwise.
> (i.e., ComCast residential service).   
> 
> If I understand SPF, this means I would have to have a SPF record for
> each of these ISP's outgoing SMTP server? 

What we do is set up an addition SMTP virtual server on the Exchange server, on a port other than 25 (we use 2525)

We configure that virtual server to require authentication.

We point the users' email clients to that server and port, and configure them to use authentication.

The ISP lets the non-port-25 SMTP traffic through, and we're not an open relay.

--

-- 
Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com               805.964.4554 x902
Hispanic Business Inc./HireDiversity.com       Software Engineer 

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, 
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-deployment <at> v2.listbox.com

SPF and ISP's restricting SMTP traffic ??'s

The 2006 SPF Council Elections

HTML: http://new.openspf.org/Council_Election/2006-01

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2006 SPF Council Elections
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

In late 2004, the community of the SPF Project decided that a more 
organized, cohesive approach would be needed in order to fight e-mail 
identity forgery and other e-mail abuse.  Thus, the SPF Council body was 
created and elected in December 2004[1].  Five council members were 
chosen[2] to lead the project over the following months:  Mark Kramer 
(Leiden, Netherlands), Chuck Mead (Cary, NC, USA), Julian Mehnle (Munich, 
Germany), Wayne Schlitt (Lincoln, NE, USA), and project founder Meng Weng 
Wong (Philadelphia, PA, USA).  In mid-2005, Chuck Mead left the council 
and Greg Connor (San Jose, CA, USA) took the open seat.

Now in 2006, one year after the council's formation, the SPF Project goes 
on to elect its second council[3].  Again, five council members will lead 
the project over the next twelve months to solidify the SPF standard and 
continue the battle against e-mail sender forgery according to the visions 
of the project's community.

According to the council election procedures that were passed just 
today[4], this year's election process starts today, on Monday 2006-01-02 
at 00:00 UTC.  Everyone is eligible to vote in the election who is 
subscribed to the spf-discuss mailing list.  As a one-time deviation from 
the formal procedures, due to tightness of schedule the eligibility key 
date will be postponed by one week.

So if you would like to participate in the 2006 council elections, please 
make sure that you are subscribed to the spf-discuss mailing list[5] by 
Monday, 2006-01-09, 00:00 UTC.

Nominations for council membership can be submitted to the spf-discuss 
mailing list before the same day.  Also before coming Monday, the sitting 
council will appoint a neutral election officer who will conduct the 
election and certify the results.

This will be the schedule of the 2006 council elections:

   Date                     Action/Phase
  ------------------------------------------------------------------
   Mon 01-02 .. Sun 01-08   Appoint Election Officer, Nomination
   Mon 01-02 .. Sun 01-15   Acceptance, Discussion
   Mon 01-09 .. Sun 01-15   Registration
   Mon 01-16 .. Sun 01-22   Voting
   Mon 01-23 .. Wed 01-25   Dispute
   Mon 01-23 .. Sun 01-29   Dispute Resolution
   Mon 01-30                Start of new Council Term

Please direct your questions and comments at the spf-discuss mailing list.

Julian Mehnle,
SPF Council Secretary.

References:
 1. http://new.openspf.org/Press_Release/2004-12-22
 2. http://new.openspf.org/Council_Election/2004-11
 3. http://new.openspf.org/Council_Election/2006-01
 4. http://new.openspf.org/Council_Election
 5. http://www.openspf.org/mailinglist.html

RE: spfmilter sometimes rejects sometimes accepts from same host

Matthew.van.Eerde wrote:
> The good news is that the mail server in question satisfies both the
> PTR and the MX requirements.  So you should get either PASS or NONE,
> right?  I still don't understand how FAIL could come up.  

Unless it's because of libspf not implementing the MX check.  That would reduce one of the records to -all.

--

-- 
Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com               805.964.4554 x902
Hispanic Business Inc./HireDiversity.com       Software Engineer