On Sat, 20 May 2017, Steve Atkins wrote:
On May 20, 2017, at 2:13 PM, John Levine wrote:
In article <3a8a3db1-a628-4cf5-add5-d2db22b5c...@blighty.com> you write:
"~all" is the smart policy to use; ignore those who tell you to use "-all" or
"?all".
Not disagreeing, but what practical diff
Hi!
Steve wrote:
> "~all" is the smart policy to use; ignore those who tell you to
> use "-all" or "?all".
Can you tell more about this ? Why is '-all' bad ?
--
p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 3 years to go !
___
mail
Hi Kurt,
At 05:25 21-05-2017, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
Can you tell more about this ? Why is '-all' bad ?
You are assuming that when the message is delivered to the receiver,
it will see a connection from the sending IP address.
Regards,
-sm
___
ma
sm,
Do you think the sending domain was not aware of that when they wrote the
policy?
Frank
-Original Message-
From: mailop [mailto:mailop-boun...@mailop.org] On Behalf Of SM
Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2017 8:13 AM
To: Kurt Jaeger ; mailop@mailop.org
Subject: Re: [mailop] SPF record
Hi Kur
On 21/05/2017 14:52, frnk...@iname.com wrote:
sm,
Do you think the sending domain was not aware of that when they wrote the
policy?
I think a lot of the disagreement comes from differing views on priorities.
For some people, the danger of receiving forged messages is paramount,
so rejecting
Hi,
I use "-all" for my primary domain simply because we
don't use mobiles, outgrew them 17 years ago. All email
from my primary will only ever originate from my server.
My primary domain doesn't forward received emails to
anywhere else on receipt, and never will.
Anyone forwards an email I've se
Hi Frank,
At 06:52 21-05-2017, frnk...@iname.com wrote:
Do you think the sending domain was not aware of that when they
wrote the policy?
I have come across cases where the sending domain was not aware of
the impact of its SPF policy. That does not mean that sending
domains are not aware of
On 21 May 2017, at 11:33, ComKal Networks wrote:
Anyone forwards an email I've sent them, then the headers
will specify their sending domain so the SPF record for
my domain should be irrelevant.
1. SPF does not operate on any email headers. It operates on the SMTP
envelope sender. RFC5321.Mai
Same here -- many of my customers, for example those who go to O365, aren't
aware of the implications when they add Microsoft's suggested SPF record,
and then wonder why some emails (originated from a non-O365 system) aren't
being received. Fortunately our helpdesk is very attuned to these issues
In article <100.10d30d0034b32159@comkal.com.au> you write:
>Anyone forwards an email I've sent them, then the headers
>will specify their sending domain so the SPF record for
>my domain should be irrelevant.
Good luck with that.
R's,
John
___
mailo
Yes.
Can also use a wizard like spfwizard.com to generate
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 19, 2017, at 9:58 PM, Bryan Blackwell wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> Please pardon the noob question, just want to make sure this is what a proper
> SPF record should look like:
>
> example.org.IN TXT
> On May 21, 2017, at 8:33 AM, ComKal Networks wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I use "-all" for my primary domain simply because we
> don't use mobiles, outgrew them 17 years ago. All email
> from my primary will only ever originate from my server.
> My primary domain doesn't forward received emails to
> an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Sun, 2017-05-21 at 12:02 -0500, frnk...@iname.com wrote:
> Same here -- many of my customers, for example those who go to O365,
> aren't
> aware of the implications when they add Microsoft's suggested SPF
> record,
> and then wonder why some email
13 matches
Mail list logo
