Re: [spfbis] Proposed spf TXT record change

Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com> Sat, 21 October 2017 10:50 UTC

Return-Path: <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE809132939 for <spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 03:50:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cqFAc-jUTcCi for <spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 03:50:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ua0-x22f.google.com (mail-ua0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 599F4132403 for <spfbis@ietf.org>; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 03:50:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ua0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id e46so9952800uaa.4 for <spfbis@ietf.org>; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 03:50:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=5juDZU4mP1JH9CGuA0Nx38AoKFEMzRuKpWCThSNzJKA=; b=cxQ4ziie1yGvYFdRFU9p5PoocvJJZ9fxXZGrTOr6Mx63jjONCfk3FvjrmhzwT9um6Q YuFfBm0OqTx++/fobhB6PSXXODuiGDDJ0riqYBHJ8zh54FwKjzgvV3rAmcQppwE0v/en cjdKYUPT2PRYOLJdNGS4C/spu+3eiWsCs9iXvDCL08EVih/utrQrraD5kQxusljUdbre iJERuz2TNJE8YPKYCYu69JpvewSLgxKiK8Xwrq/Pzp3sGd90tlRUdPpsBUaxm6Uyj4p7 9kSDbFftGKWV0IEW+M2Uuq+JXiXTQSnxrK3XQR57EX2e03lvk10D/gPKHJodGX6sP8tz VXfw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=5juDZU4mP1JH9CGuA0Nx38AoKFEMzRuKpWCThSNzJKA=; b=Q5AYgTMRP351ub3pEwUhKFpD4+yy0aDBGIDYxE9SlT5wHTB3sXAcpduW+5U3HC3vWQ oZoUAd9U4Rjvs5VtiQF8ZCjLvLUqE9Dl+XamPwlH+89aaJh3Km1MVxzreLDnDnseLHWk FNGzJIqLRdNmu5HFSH16G+edkpdtX4M5nqeNf5IJy31hGbxGzncRzp/rNiNKmA5+WJsA fLy8BfrK9uVO0lF5NKraCsc3ms4bNFycmjb43jAoA+X9OgMEFejGOuucoHd68VXb/qDX YakgVgVOHFHTs28RDQ8w/C3vJCsVAJT2p/6v/oVbpAda3j/H9lA5vy2kNks7iUDHNw5J t/Gg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaUB4exqiVcRBuu6jsY1IbuLirOATWE9oP9kqd6312K0su+2RS5O TdTrzPvvJ+C0k0EHP5cSTfpeT5JZhcyOVSWDnEsWUlw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+SmEryLRYkapBirbOoQsVnsAcolxcpkMXAoC6ix8vh4CZuugdKKiddhUYK4mCPJqAQpp1+f6+3pdlyShQ5EIO8=
X-Received: by 10.176.82.131 with SMTP id v3mr5810530uav.15.1508583055158; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 03:50:55 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.176.95.196 with HTTP; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 03:50:54 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20160210022525.98482.qmail@ary.lan>
References: <56BA775B.9050109@ragged-software.com> <20160210022525.98482.qmail@ary.lan>
From: Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 12:50:54 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHhFyboXk6TmBs7p=Ln=7Y4=S6_u3wJdehHDRSiW9wFwzxUXBQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "spfbis@ietf.org" <spfbis@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spfbis/RyK490bqbYtnPd1D2XQPuF3X1Js>
Subject: Re: [spfbis] Proposed spf TXT record change
X-BeenThere: spfbis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: SPFbis discussion list <spfbis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spfbis>, <mailto:spfbis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spfbis/>
List-Post: <mailto:spfbis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spfbis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spfbis>, <mailto:spfbis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 10:50:57 -0000

On 10/02/2016, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>; wrote:
>> I think the spf information should be placed in a TXT record
>>attached to a _spf selector (e.g. _spf.example.com).

> You're right, but you're also a decade too late.  Forget it.

Indeed, sadly. SPF was a kind of hack, considered as "script" (not by
me) or baroque (by me). As of 2017 I'm delighted that an intentional
bounce (sending to one of those no-reply@ addresses) gets a clean SPF
PASS by gmail, they consider their own failure reports as okay.