On 08/03/2024 18:45, Hector Santos wrote:
I believe it is correct, SHOULD strive to trusted known sources. The final
mechanism SHOULD be one of (hard) failure. This is what we (ideally) strive
for. I believe anything weaker is a waste of computational resources, causes
confusion using
I believe it is correct, SHOULD strive to trusted known sources. The final
mechanism SHOULD be one of (hard) failure. This is what we (ideally) strive
for. I believe anything weaker is a waste of computational resources, causes
confusion using neutral or even soft fails especially with
On 05/03/2024 17:07, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On March 5, 2024 3:46:39 PM UTC, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
Todd Herr writes:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 9:30 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
in section 5.5.1, Publish an SPF Policy for an Aligned Domain, the last
sentence says:
On March 5, 2024 3:46:39 PM UTC, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>Todd Herr writes:
>> On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 9:30 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>>
>>> in section 5.5.1, Publish an SPF Policy for an Aligned Domain, the last
>>> sentence says:
>>>
>>> The SPF record
Todd Herr writes:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 9:30 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
in section 5.5.1, Publish an SPF Policy for an Aligned Domain, the last
sentence says:
The SPF record SHOULD be constructed
at a minimum to ensure an SPF pass verdict for all
On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 9:30 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> Hi,
>
> in section 5.5.1, Publish an SPF Policy for an Aligned Domain, the last
> sentence says:
>
> The SPF record SHOULD be constructed
> at a minimum to ensure an SPF pass verdict for all known
Hi,
in section 5.5.1, Publish an SPF Policy for an Aligned Domain, the last
sentence says:
The SPF record SHOULD be constructed
at a minimum to ensure an SPF pass verdict for all known sources of
mail for the RFC5321.MailFrom domain.
As we learnt, an
