RE: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: wayne [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: vrijdag 1 december 2006 15:40
> To: SRS discussions
> Subject: Re: [srs-discuss] private relay ... could i use srs 
> to avoid spffail?
> 
> 
> In <[email protected]> Mark 
> <[email protected]> writes:
> 
> > I use SRS on *all* outgoing mail. It's extremely useful for 
> > detecting fake DSNs. That alone makes it very worthwhile. I never
> > get even a single fake DSN here.
> 
> Doesn't doing SRS on all outgoing email cause problems with certain
> mailing lists (ezlm?), vacation programs and other (broken) stuff
> that assumes the 2821.MAILFROM stays constant?

Dunno about constant; but ezlm, for one, uses the envelope-from to
determine a person's subscription-status (I think it's configurable
actually). They, too, should not be doing that, really (and use mail
header info instead). So, yes; those rare cases can cause an issue. I have
a short SRS exempt-list for those.

But like M$ doing pseudo-callbacks, with the From: identity, that's just a
matter of dealing with very broken software. And no, I do not compensate
for Outlook (Express) idiocy. If ppl complain, let them write a letter to
M$ and ask them to read an RFC or two.

> Some people have also suggested that by using SRS on all outgoing
> email lets you reject bogus bounces, but in order to do that you have
> to make sure that *ALL* legitimate email sent using your domain name
> gets processed by SRS. Roaming users and people working form home and
> such have to be tought to always use RFC2476's SMTP submission port
> (587).

Indeed. That's a good thing to teach em anyway; not just for SRS. :)

- Mark 
 
        System Administrator Asarian-host.org
 
---
"If you were supposed to understand it,
we wouldn't call it code." - FedEx