
mengwong at dumbo
Jan 29, 2004, 6:29 PM
Post #1 of 1
(707 views)
Permalink
|
|
new result values: none, neutral, and softfail
|
|
Hey guys, I cleared up some confusion in the return codes --- the old "unknown" conflated two concepts, an explicit "?" and an error state caused by parsing / interpretation problems. They have been disambiguated into "neutral" ("?") and "unknown". Functionally they are identical so this change is fully backward compatible with existing libraries. I also added two new return codes, "none" and "softfail" as per discussion earlier this week. Implementors, please add these codes to your Received-SPF header. It took me about 20 minutes to make the change in Mail::SPF::Query. On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 08:24:02PM -0500, Philip Gladstone wrote: | Does this mean I should change MSQ to return these 7 results? I think | that it makes sense to do so, and I will do so unless someone shouts I believe they're all in 1.991 as of late last night. | mengwong [at] dumbo wrote: | | > | >3 Interpretation | > | > When an SPF client evaluates a domain's SPF policy, this evaluation | > produces one of seven results: | > | > None: The domain does not publish SPF data. | > | > Neutral (?): The SPF client MUST proceed as if a domain did not | > publish SPF data. This result occurs if the domain explicitly | > specifies a "?" value, or if processing "falls off the end" of | > the SPF record. | > | > Pass (+): the message meets the publishing domain's definition of | > legitimacy. MTAs proceed to apply local policy and MAY accept or | > reject the message accordingly. | > | > Fail (-): the message does not meet a domain's definition of | > legitimacy. MTAs MAY reject the message using a permanent | > failure reply code. (Code 550 is RECOMMENDED. See RFC2821 [11] | > section 7.1) | > | > Softfail (~): the message does not meet a domain's strict | > definition of legitimacy, but the domain cannot confidently state | > that the message is a forgery. MTAs SHOULD accept the message | > but MAY subject it to a higher transaction cost, deeper scrutiny, | > or an unfavourable score in a rule-based system. | > | > There are two error conditions, one temporary and one permanent. | > | > Error: indicates an error during lookup; an MTA MAY reject the | > message using a transient failure code, such as 450. | > | > Unknown: indicates incomplete processing: an MTA MUST proceed as | > if a domain did not publish SPF data. | > | >So what used to be "unknown" has now been broken out into | >"unknown-as-error" and "neutral-as-explicitly-defined". | > | >You end up with the same behaviour but you can speak more accurately | >about the semantics. | > | >And we bring back softfail because I really think AOL should be doing | >~all and not ?all. Of all the ISPs in the world they probably have the | >most tightly constrained userbase, and can say with the most confidence | >that if it's not coming through an AOL server, it's not really an AOL | >user. Correct me if I'm wrong. | > ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname@Ë`Ì{5¤¨wâÇSÓ°)h
|