Re: Malformed Received-SPF header

Hello Sam.

Am 16.03.25 um 01:48 schrieb Sam Varshavchik:
> That's reasonable enough, despite RFC 4408's status that "it does not 
> specify an Internet standard of any kind". Par for the course, I 
> suppose. This change obviously causes a problem for anything that 
> expects Courier's current header format, obviously, but "it does not 
> specify an Internet standard of any kind" cuts both ways, here.

I'm sorry, I did not dig deep enough. Found a reference to RFC 4408 and 
was happy with it.

The correct document is RFC 7208. :)

For sure, I'd suggest to keep your SPF=... flag for backward 
compatibility but you could add the identity flag anyway.


> I was curious about the history here, and looked into it. Courier's SPF 
> implementation predates RFC 4408, and it was based on an earlier draft. 
> Back then, I suppose, not much care was given about any existing 
> implementations, before RFC 4408 was published.

Yeah, I know that Courier's implementation is one of the pioneers in SPF.



_______________________________________________
courier-users mailing list
[email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users