Re: [Asrg] misconception in SPF

SM <sm@resistor.net> Sun, 09 December 2012 08:50 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@resistor.net>
X-Original-To: asrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54F8A21F89BD for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 00:50:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.629
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.629 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.030, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MHfoyB7gTR1n for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 00:50:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B310821F8538 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 00:50:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qB98oHVC023487 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 00:50:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1355043023; bh=UErr3y+zi3+PjKGAi619f+T3n782d/gUGpNPVArInbI=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Cc; b=mnJ7jnxXBDkpnbsBup5I00WJtcjL/xIHVtWD6KfdUh1VL1X/k+Zs1FBZk5E9PbRbE GPmpxl6gxG8S9iotQe7u+hWc5d54cfcsgmQhIfutWkKLN7Yr2xkaBLwCHb52MP2wng gnH9CCNppZbYtn/lQRNM5RJDLuG0ipybUFyuNz14=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1355043023; i=@resistor.net; bh=UErr3y+zi3+PjKGAi619f+T3n782d/gUGpNPVArInbI=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Cc; b=aBaJegssPsilIyPkJkQlU9e7N51fsjjnrb1hJVjZ6z6tZsWX6GvTDwXqRDcDF1Odw LBwn9ylE2u5ieXEcZxAkUYqUtRMUfe5QUzg1I8UFFho9NdTCeiM2VBr6nO6X5kT1Gq ugCUASaAQszI+fXipGwgHCuONcZwJ8r8MyAaqxtg=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20121209003503.095b5758@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2012 00:42:24 -0800
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
From: SM <sm@resistor.net>
In-Reply-To: <BF717AC8-D422-412B-BF97-AAD0D5F04E7A@billmail.scconsult.co m>
References: <20121206212116.10328.qmail@joyce.lan> <50C1A95A.5000001@pscs.co.uk> <CAFdugan=tzj+oMMSLH0ukWHK5jF7tSjbp5jx1uBauaq_YF6pxw@mail.gmail.com> <50C21EFC.4060508@pscs.co.uk> <6.2.5.6.2.20121207091426.0b4ecdf0@resistor.net> <50C244A6.1040402@pscs.co.uk> <6.2.5.6.2.20121207132220.0b7304f8@resistor.net> <BF717AC8-D422-412B-BF97-AAD0D5F04E7A@billmail.scconsult.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Subject: Re: [Asrg] misconception in SPF
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2012 08:50:28 -0000

At 11:03 08-12-2012, Bill Cole wrote:
>If that sentence is not mis-worded, it is a declaration of ignorance 
>of important fundamental facts about how email works. RFC5321 is 
>required reading for anyone who wants

The sentence is likely incorrectly phrased.

>There are many strong arguments for mail systems to refrain from 
>attempting to require strict compliance to many details of the SMTP 
>and email format standards, but it is unhelpful to assume that 
>historically or even currently widespread forbearance of operational 
>enforcement of some facet of the standards grants any sort of 
>validity to non-compliant messages.

Yes.

Regards,
-sm