On 7/7/21 2:57 am, John Levine via dmarc-discuss wrote:
It appears that Alessandro Vesely via dmarc-discuss <ves...@tana.it> said:
>> I'd suggest that a resolution to this might be to expand the finite limit (I've
>> also had trouble with the 10 lookup limit, even for a small organisation),
>
>Why do organizations need more than 10 lookups? Do they have a choice of
>several smart hosts? (And the latter need, to avail of reputed smart hosts,
>keeps looking to me like a DMARC failure.)
Because they contract out their mail to several providers and include all those
providers' SPF records. I agree that many of those providers use too many
records
(e.g., _spf.google.com is four records that easily could have been one) but you
can't legislate being smart.
Yes, precisely that.
>An "SPF compiler" could gather a ton of addresses and dynamically assign them
>to the.only.a.mechanism.U.need.example.com.
It could, but it'd be a lot easier to find the constant "10" in your SPF library
and change it to something like 50. While you're at it, get rid of the empty
result limit which screws up IPv6 checks.
+1
- Roland
_______________________________________________
dmarc-discuss mailing list
dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org
http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss
NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms
(http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
