IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [spfbis] Local macros strike again, was Suggestion...

Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net> Fri, 20 January 2012 09:06 UTC

Return-Path: <hsantos@isdg.net>
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 6385621F84D0 for <spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 01:06:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.103
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.103 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.496, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jk1m1aOnRK4v for <spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 01:06:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.santronics.com (ntbbs.santronics.com [208.247.131.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0040121F858A for <spfbis@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 01:06:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=isdg.net; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/relaxed; l=773; t=1327050376; h=Received:Received: Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:Organization:To:Subject: List-ID; bh=8gR+8d/0Prs6Z1ewRnrIdv3aGPU=; b=aQ90lVU6MvofVb/LBNZi T07grk/kvi0q3QhOCNzcjgTfg3iHvsWiifRoqy2otqC1AXSOXf31RMPKFPe9lgr9 gfpnRvaPh7c90CEMtkJKbVFJzD9Plgg6YBPPPev5yNycpJg+WOnRrXft4uezFsFW GwzyknB8h2gSCFgxUw6nILI=
Received: by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v6.4.454.1) for spfbis@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 04:06:16 -0500
Authentication-Results: dkim.winserver.com; dkim=pass header.d=beta.winserver.com header.s=tms1 header.i=beta.winserver.com; adsp=pass policy=all author.d=isdg.net asl.d=beta.winserver.com;
Received: from beta.winserver.com ([208.247.131.23]) by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v6.4.454.1) with ESMTP id 252253073.44950.2664; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 04:06:15 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=beta.winserver.com; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/relaxed; l=773; t=1327050187; h=Received:Received: Message-ID:Date:From:Organization:To:Subject:List-ID; bh=h9ZhrdT aft7dmpi1kLjiRMMG/aGGKRI6VfGdciwu4SU=; b=awwPtnDJzQ+DGBXKw8+DuO9 XI+u3jH2PQXXYWn77rloJHe2YCnbEFquUHBLga5jFez3ZivCAj45wBV7/FuHvINA +ykOKkyye3d78eI9ml30Qyfj0UqY/Bf8jsFSqUAPSWJ5hhBb6AIlXZBmmH2Mhb89 IIp8VCfOqJBfFQ6soTIM=
Received: by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v6.4.454.1) for spfbis@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 04:03:07 -0500
Received: from [192.168.1.101] ([99.3.147.93]) by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v6.4.454.1) with ESMTP id 851209798.6257.3600; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 04:03:06 -0500
Message-ID: <4F192E82.2090000@isdg.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 04:06:10 -0500
From: Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net>
Organization: Santronics Software, Inc.
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: spfbis@ietf.org
References: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C15673@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <4F1190BB.9080202@mail-abuse.org> <4F16A2FB.3070709@isdg.net> <60329510.PUQKVUEzYr@scott-latitude-e6320> <4F192869.2060101@isdg.net>
In-Reply-To: <4F192869.2060101@isdg.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [spfbis] Local macros strike again, was Suggestion...
X-BeenThere: spfbis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 09:06:26 -0000

Hector Santos wrote:

> There is no logic when its applied to anonymous senders and the only 
> conceivable rule is one based on an integrated multi-behavior MTA 
> sender/receiver "All-In-One" machine/network. In other words, something 
> like our own system that is a single MTA with multiple rules, 
> receiver/router/sender.   Its a MSA when the user authenticates and mail 
> is received, its a MDA when the user DOES NOT authenticate for local 
> mail only reception and a thread does the routing for remote mail 
> feeding it to the sender thread(s).   So such a rule would apply to us, 
> but I assume it to be the case for other systems.

Correction: "but I can't assume ....."

-- 
Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email