Re: Re: [spf-help] SRS for Exim
wayne <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.spam.srs.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
In <[email protected]> Tony Finch <[email protected]> writes: > On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Meng Weng Wong wrote: > >> | > It would be good to add a mechanism to SPF that allows a domain to state >> | > that it signs its sender addresses >> | >> | This is an excellent idea that Meng should seriously consider. >> >> i would be happy to do that. how about a modifier like srs=decline or >> would ses=always be more appropriate? > > I would have thought that it should be a mechanism rather than a modifier, > though I'm a bit murky on where the boundary between them falls. For > example why is include a mechanism and redirect a modifier? Perhaps some > more explanatory text could be added to the specification. BTFOOM why redirect is a modifier instead of a mechanism like include. They both change the SPF result. Once upon a time, the "all" mechanism was a modifier too. > A slight problem is that this would make SPF dependent on another > specification that hasn't been written yet... Well, if it is a modifier, it doesn't change the SPF result. Email receivers are free to recognize the ses=always modifier if they want and take the correct action. -wayne