headers
Stuart D. Gathman | 5 Sep 2008 21:29

Sender-id records

I am considering checking for spf2.0/mfrom records when there is no v=spf1 
record.  Does anyone have stats on whether any of these actually exist?  
(I do not plan to check PRA given patent issues and general uselessness of 
doing so.)

If both v=spf1 and spf2.0/mfrom records exist, then I will give the v=spf1 
record precedence.  I don't think this is addressed in either spec.

--

-- 
	      Stuart D. Gathman <stuart <at> bmsi.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.
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Frank Ellermann | 7 Sep 2008 11:31
Picon
Picon

New tool(s)

Hi, for info, Dave B moved his "dig" form to a new
server, and added an SPF check page while at it,
check it out:  <http://tools.bevhost.com/spf/>

 Frank
--

-- 
Already noted on <http://www.openspf.org/Tools>
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Frank Ellermann | 7 Sep 2008 14:07
Picon
Picon

Re: Sender-id records

Stuart D. Gathman wrote:

> I am considering checking for spf2.0/mfrom records
> when there is no v=spf1 record.  Does anyone have
> stats on whether any of these actually exist?

Please inform us if you figure this out.  I consider
to deprecate this zoo:  Either v=spf1 or spf2.0/pra,
aything else only muddies the water.  Four records
(TXT+SPF, SPF+PRA) are bad enough for folks wishing
to test PRA.  

IMHO nobody needs v=spf1 op=pra or spf2.0/mfrom,pra
or spf2.0/pra,mfrom shorthands, it's only confusing.

 Frank
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Frank Ellermann | 7 Sep 2008 14:19
Picon
Picon

Re: Last erratum last call

[Trimmed fwd from the devel list where it got no reply]:

[...] 
> I think all of us are mostly on the same page now with
> regard to the issue matter.

Yes, as far as possible.  Clearly an issue that needs a
better fix than the "last erratum" at some point in time.

> Your proposal puts all the stuff in the "PermError"
> definition in section 2.5.7.  I don't think that's
> appropriate.

More like KISS than appropriate.  And your concern was
that some implementations don't return a PemError, but
ignore the directive.

> How about the attached diff instead?

I've split the text in "variant 1" (as it was), adding
your text as "variant 2".  

"Variant 2" consists of two parts, the forward pointer
to section 8 (macros) is replaced by a forward pointer
to section 4.8 (domain-spec).

The second part of "variant 2" is a new paragraph to be
inserted at the end of section 4.8.  One statement in
your proposal IMO needs some wordsmithing before a new
consensus poll:
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Boyd Lynn Gerber | 12 Sep 2008 18:58

www.openspf.org

I can not access www.openspf.org.  It started late yesterday.

--
Boyd Gerber <gerberb <at> zenez.com>
ZENEZ	1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah  84047
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Julian Mehnle | 13 Sep 2008 22:22
Gravatar

Re: New tool(s)


Frank Ellermann wrote:
> Hi, for info, Dave B moved his "dig" form to a new server, and added an
> SPF check page while at it, check it out:
> <http://tools.bevhost.com/spf/> 

Too bad it doesn't support IPv6.  It seems to be able to look up reverse 
DNS for IPv6 addresses, but the SPF check itself always fails.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
spf-discuss | 14 Sep 2008 07:00
Favicon

SPF Mail Summary Report

                    iMail News Gateway Server v3.1                    
          (c) Copyright 1996-2005 Santronics Software, Inc.           

                        Mail Forum Statistics                         
                Date Range : 07 Sep 2008 - 13 Sep 2008
                Report Date: 14 Sep 2008

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Summary:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Total Forums          : 2
Total Messages        : 15
Total Participants    : 8
Total Vendor Postings : 0
Total Mail/No Replies : 1  (6%)
          6+ Days Old : 0    4+ Days Old: 0
          2+ Days Old : 0    1 Day Old  : 1
Busiest Posting Hour  : 7am  (3 msgs)
Busiest Posting Day   : Sunday  (5 msgs)

+-[ Hourly Posting Pattern ]----------------------+
|               *                                 |
|               *                                 |
|               *                                 |
|               *                                 |
|               * *             *                 |
|               * *             *                 |
|               * *             *                 |
|         * * * * * *     * *   * *           *   |
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Boyd Lynn Gerber | 16 Sep 2008 15:11

www.openspf.org


Hello,

www.openspf.org is still down and not responding.  Does anyone have access 
to the machine?  We really need to get this fixed.   I keep getting 
responses from people I refer to the site about not being able to get the 
information.

Thanks,

--
Boyd Gerber <gerberb <at> zenez.com>
ZENEZ	1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah  84047
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Julian Mehnle | 16 Sep 2008 23:48
Gravatar

www.openspf.org


Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
> www.openspf.org is still down and not responding.  Does anyone have
> access to the machine?  We really need to get this fixed.   I keep
> getting responses from people I refer to the site about not being able
> to get the information.

The site is ... was? ... running on Wayne's box.  Unfortunately Scott and 
I have been unable to reach Wayne for the past two weeks (even before the 
box actually went down).  Even more unfortunately, there's little we can 
do now, since we don't even control the domain name.  It's in Wayne's 
hands until we manage to get ahold of him. :-(
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Boyd Lynn Gerber | 17 Sep 2008 01:14

www.openspf.org


On Tue, 16 Sep 2008, Julian Mehnle wrote:
> Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
>> www.openspf.org is still down and not responding.  Does anyone have
>> access to the machine?  We really need to get this fixed.   I keep
>> getting responses from people I refer to the site about not being able
>> to get the information.
>
> The site is ... was? ... running on Wayne's box.  Unfortunately Scott and
> I have been unable to reach Wayne for the past two weeks (even before the
> box actually went down).  Even more unfortunately, there's little we can
> do now, since we don't even control the domain name.  It's in Wayne's
> hands until we manage to get ahold of him. :-(

What happens if something has happened to Wayne?  Do we have a backup?  Is 
he the only one authorised?  I thought the Council was going to have 
multiple people on it?  Is there a backup of the site some where?  I know 
I wanted to mirror it, but never got access to it.  I do have a lot of the 
public svn local, but that is all I have.  I guess I am thinking it is 
time we come up with a plan B.  I hope Wayne is all right but just incase. 
We need to have options.

Thanks,

--
Boyd Gerber <gerberb <at> zenez.com>
ZENEZ	1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah  84047
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |

Gmane