On Friday, January 23, 2015 18:27:46 Anne Bennett wrote:
I seem to have wandered into a bit of a minefield. :-/
Obviously I like Murray's proposed changes, since they're
based on mine :-), but I see that he has added typically
in a couple of places... and I begin to understand why it's
- Original Message -
From: Michael Jack Assels mjass...@encs.concordia.ca
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 4:06:12 PM
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] questions on the spec, was ... and two more tiny
nits, while I'm at it
What seems like ages ago, on Thu, 22 Jan 2015
Franck Martin fra...@peachymango.org responds to my suggestion
for text for 4.1:
[SPF], which authenticates:
- the domain found in an [SMTP] HELO or EHLO command
(the HELO result), and/or
- the domain found in an [SMTP] MAIL command, or the domain
found in the
- Original Message -
From: Scott Kitterman skl...@kitterman.com
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 4:17:57 PM
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] the painful issue of SPF HELO
On Friday, January 23, 2015 18:27:46 Anne Bennett wrote:
I seem to have wandered into a bit of a
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Franck Martin fra...@peachymango.org
wrote:
On Friday, January 23, 2015 18:27:46 Anne Bennett wrote:
How about this:
[SPF] can authenticate both the domain found in an [SMTP] HELO/EHLO
command (the HELO identity) and the domain found in an [SMTP]
