What would be a safe condition to use SPF, without being too stringent?
On Jan 25, 2013, at 9:20 PM, Todd Lyons <tlyons@???> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:22 AM, Raymond Norton <admin@???> wrote:
>> The comments were my feeble attempt to fix things. How should it read,
>> where spf is still used, but not constrictive?
>
> Let's go over the lines:
>
> deny message = SPF_MSG
> spf = = fail
>
> It means "deny the email with the message SPF_MSG, *IF* the spf fails".
>
> Compare that to what you have:
>
> deny message = SPF_MSG
> #spf = = fail
>
> It means "deny the email with the message SPF_MSG" (implied "no matter
> what", aka "for every message I see").
>
> Adjust it by commenting it all out:
>
> #deny message = SPF_MSG
> # spf = = fail
>
> ...Todd
> --
> The total budget at all receivers for solving senders' problems is $0.
> If you want them to accept your mail and manage it the way you want,
> send it the way the spec says to. --John Levine
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
