From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750729AbWFKSun (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jun 2006 14:50:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750764AbWFKSun (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jun 2006 14:50:43 -0400 Received: from mail.enyo.de ([212.9.189.167]:58066 "EHLO mail.enyo.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750729AbWFKSum (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jun 2006 14:50:42 -0400 From: Florian Weimer To: Matti Aarnio Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: VGER does gradual SPF activation (FAQ matter) References: <20060610222734.GZ27502@mea-ext.zmailer.org> Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 20:50:37 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20060610222734.GZ27502@mea-ext.zmailer.org> (Matti Aarnio's message of "Sun, 11 Jun 2006 01:27:34 +0300") Message-ID: <87ac8jsf0i.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Matti Aarnio: > What will break ? > > You really should go and read SPF documents and guides and FAQs at: > http://spf.pobox.com/ The SPF specification is extremely loose, and it is hard to predict for SPF record owners how their policy indications are interpreted. For example, will you treat SoftFail, TempError and PermError as Fail?