Re: RFC 8601, clarification needed
"John Levine" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.smtp |
|---|---|
| Organization | Taughannock Networks |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
It appears that David Bürgin <[email protected]> said: >1) > >Authentication-Results: mail.example.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=example.com >Authentication-Results: mail.example.org; spf=pass smtp.helo=mail.example.com That is wrong. One A-R per pass through the MTA, please. >Authentication-Results: mail.example.org; > spf=pass smtp.helo=mail.example.com; > spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=example.com You can do that if you want. >A subsequent component could then use these results as input to some >spam score, for example. You could, although in practice the HELO check doesn't tell you anything useful except when it's used as a fallback due to a null MAIL FROM. The useful HELO check is to see if it exists at all, with a nonexistent one being a close to 100% accurate spam signal. But if it doesn't exist, there is no SPF record so SPF tells you nothing. R's, John _______________________________________________ ietf-smtp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp