Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 01:08:29 +0200 From: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> To: Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de>, Ion-Mihai IOnut Tetcu <itetcu@FreeBSD.org>, jumper99@gmx.de Subject: Re: Attn. "Helmut Schneider" <jumper99@gmx.de> Message-ID: <20060518230829.GA15524@merlin.emma.line.org> In-Reply-To: <1147989359.69696.7.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> References: <20060518132527.37c9d23d@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <m3d5eb58a1.fsf@merlin.emma.line.org> <1147989359.69696.7.camel@ikaros.oook.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 18 May 2006, Pav Lucistnik wrote: > Matthias Andree p=ED=B9e v =E8t 18. 05. 2006 v 23:32 +0200: > > As I can inject my message directly to GMX, I'm Cc'ing Helmut Schneider. > >=20 > > Ion-Mihai "IOnut" Tetcu <itetcu@freebsd.org> writes: > >=20 > > > gmx.de stupidly blocks mails from guys with @freebsd.org emails :) > > > > > > freebsd.org descriptive text "v=3Dspf1 ip4:216.136.204.119 ~all" > > > means that listed ip is _NOT_ the only one legitimate SMTP server for= freebsd.org. > > > > > > This last shit is nothing new as, in my experience, gmx.de is one of = the > > > worse administered email servers. You might want to change your email > > > address to some other service, with at least half-competent admins. > >=20 > > Wrong- the downstream is free to decide what to make of SPF information. >=20 > Wrong - they should respect what the definition of ~all in SPF specs is. Well - they set the policies what to accept. If they choose to refuse all messages that have an "e" in the Subject: header content, you can complain as much as you want, but they're still free to refuse messages just because of "Subject: Re: foo". That they're free to do that or misinterpret SPF doesn't mean I endorse their behavior. The user can stop such nonsense, hence my CC'ing Helmut - no non-delivery notice yet. GMX also say that envelope senders should be subjected to SRS (sender rewriting), but I don't endorse such either. SPF/SRS attack the problem =66rom the wrong end, but that isn't covered by the charter of this list and has been discussed a thousand times in several dozen places. --=20 Matthias Andree
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060518230829.GA15524>