From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932233AbWFMUsl (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jun 2006 16:48:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932240AbWFMUsl (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jun 2006 16:48:41 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:1503 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932233AbWFMUsk (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jun 2006 16:48:40 -0400 Subject: Re: VGER does gradual SPF activation (FAQ matter) From: David Woodhouse To: Lennart Sorensen Cc: Auke Kok , Marc Perkel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20060613203108.GE560@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> References: <200606130300.k5D302rc004233@laptop11.inf.utfsm.cl> <1150189506.11159.93.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20060613104557.GA13597@merlin.emma.line.org> <1150201475.12423.12.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com> <20060613124944.GA16171@merlin.emma.line.org> <448ED798.2080706@perkel.com> <448EE057.6010101@foo-projects.org> <1150228444.11159.101.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20060613203108.GE560@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 21:48:57 +0100 Message-Id: <1150231737.11159.118.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.2 (2.6.2-1.fc5.1.dwmw2.2) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 16:31 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 08:54:03PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > > On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 08:57 -0700, Auke Kok wrote: > > > and this will also get you blacklisted - it is not allowed to have non-working > > > or bogus MX records. See http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/policy-bogusmx.php > > > > Just set it to an IPv6-only host; that'll have the same effect on most > > of the Luddites out there without being invalid. > > That particular site did explictly state that they treat ipv6 only hosts > the same as invalid hosts. So not much point doing that either, unless > you like being blacklisted. Oh, in that case, it can just get dumped in the pile of other kook-blacklists and we don't need to worry about it. Shame; I didn't realise RFC-ignorant.org was so, well, ignorant. -- dwmw2