From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org)
	by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-18753-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@gentoo.org>)
	id 1GhrTE-0008AL-Or
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:44:17 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id kA8HgJ49018028;
	Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:42:19 GMT
Received: from panther.panther.lieber.org (mail.lieber.org [64.147.188.100])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id kA8HbbBt025943
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:37:38 GMT
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by panther.panther.lieber.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C8AEE84023
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed,  8 Nov 2006 17:37:37 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at lieber.org
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599,
	NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from panther.panther.lieber.org ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (panther.lieber.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id aP7sV1hDpCCB for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>;
	Wed,  8 Nov 2006 17:37:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by panther.panther.lieber.org (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 3FC9EE84022; Wed,  8 Nov 2006 17:37:24 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:37:24 +0000
From: Kurt Lieber <klieber@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for November
Message-ID: <20061108173724.GZ4007@mail.lieber.org>
References: <20061101134037.6F126649AC@smtp.gentoo.org> <454DDAC3.4030208@gentoo.org> <1162841820.10506.42.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> <200611062325.19963.kugelfang@gentoo.org> <20061108150740.GV4007@mail.lieber.org> <455211B0.5080202@gentoo.org>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="lzfPtAjrR1KYNfg0"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <455211B0.5080202@gentoo.org>
X-GPG-Key: http://www.lieber.org/kurtl.pub.gpg
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
X-Archives-Salt: bc000358-4d96-470f-b339-91ec2e03a75f
X-Archives-Hash: 4e052d340352463ae20901a5ef1357d9


--lzfPtAjrR1KYNfg0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline

On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 07:19:44PM +0200 or thereabouts, Alin Nastac wrote:
> I say we should have +all (SPF-capable MTAs will consider any IP address
> as authorized to send mail on behalf of g.o - equivalent with "Message
> source OK").

this interpretation is correct.

> He says we should have ?all (when another SPF-capable MTA will check the
> my IP address, it will take my message with a grain of salt - equivalent
> with "Message source unknown").

this interpretation is not correct.  What you are describing is ~all, not
?all.  ?all instructs the MTA to make no interpretation at all related to a
failure. In other words, do not add or subtract any salt whatsoever.[1]
~all tells the MTA to add some salt.[2]

--kurt

[1] http://new.openspf.org/RFC_4408#op-result-neutral
[2] http://new.openspf.org/RFC_4408#op-result-softfail

--lzfPtAjrR1KYNfg0
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFUhXUJPpRNiftIEYRAsQ5AJ9+Haik6rqCHXhGakIPDJ1l1UkI6QCfcs90
Y2Mn1Otw5l9VpZciW5si5F8=
=5XVy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--lzfPtAjrR1KYNfg0--
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list