From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752092AbWFLP4E (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:56:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752093AbWFLP4D (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:56:03 -0400 Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([212.18.232.186]:53519 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752092AbWFLP4C (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:56:02 -0400 Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 16:55:52 +0100 From: Russell King To: Neil Brown Cc: Matti Aarnio , zwane@holomorphy.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: VGER does gradual SPF activation (FAQ matter) Message-ID: <20060612155552.GA322@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mail-Followup-To: Neil Brown , Matti Aarnio , zwane@holomorphy.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20060610222734.GZ27502@mea-ext.zmailer.org> <20060611072223.GA16150@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20060612083239.GA27502@mea-ext.zmailer.org> <20060612084012.GA7291@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <17549.14978.52678.562114@cse.unsw.edu.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17549.14978.52678.562114@cse.unsw.edu.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 07:57:22PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote: > On Monday June 12, rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 11:32:39AM +0300, Matti Aarnio wrote: > > > SPF is application level version of this type of source sanity > > > enforcement, and all that I intend to do is to publish that TXT > > > entry for VGER. Analyzing SPF data in incoming SMTP reception > > > is a thing that I leave for latter phase (how much latter, > > > I can't say yet.) > > > > In which case I have no option but to ask - Zwane, please stop using > > my systems to forward your lkml email - Matti's proposed change will > > potentially break that setup. > > Of course you do have other options. Since you haven't read my original reply to Matti, your comments aren't appropriate for me since you don't know the full story. However, I will point out that I'm at liberty to choose any option I deem to be appropriate, for whatever reasons I feel appropriate. In this situation, I feel that withdrawing from providing mail forwarding facilities is most appropriate. I've been thinking about withdrawing that for some time for other reasons - the SPF argument has provided another, and the final reason to make it happen. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core