Re: [mailop] IBM SPF vs smtp.notes.na.collabserv.com

2016-01-08 Thread John Levine
>> They publish -all and it makes sense. > >dig paypal.com txt +short | grep spf > >"v=spf1 include:pp._spf.paypal.com include:3ph1._spf.paypal.com >include:3ph2._spf.paypal.com include:3ph3._spf.paypal.com >include:3ph4._spf.paypal.com include:c._spf.ebay.com ~all" Huh. That's new. They do publ

Re: [mailop] IBM SPF vs smtp.notes.na.collabserv.com

2016-01-08 Thread Carl Byington
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 2016-01-08 at 16:39 +, John Levine wrote: > They publish -all and it makes sense. dig paypal.com txt +short | grep spf "v=spf1 include:pp._spf.paypal.com include:3ph1._spf.paypal.com include:3ph2._spf.paypal.com include:3ph3._spf.paypal

Re: [mailop] IBM SPF vs smtp.notes.na.collabserv.com

2016-01-08 Thread John Levine
>Surely deploying ~all is done in order for you to determine which edge cases >won't pass, prior to considering a move to -all? In a word, no. If your name is Paypal, you can probably control the hosts that send mail with your return address, the mail is of low value since it rarely says anyth