From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262751AbVAJXjf (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:39:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262551AbVAJXjQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:39:16 -0500 Received: from mail1.webmaster.com ([216.152.64.168]:38407 "EHLO mail1.webmaster.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262755AbVAJXgJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:36:09 -0500 From: "David Schwartz" To: "Adrian Bunk" Cc: "Linux Kernel Mailing List" Subject: RE: [2.6 patch] remove SPF-using wbsd lists from MAINTAINERS Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:36:01 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <1105382033.12054.90.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:12:01 -0800 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:12:03 -0800 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > On Llu, 2005-01-10 at 18:43, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > IMHO lists rejecting emails based on some non-standard extension don't > > belong into MAINTAINERS. > > Find out why someone is publishing records saying your mail isnt valid > instead of moaning here. If they are using SPF and you are not using any > strange extensions its fine. You or your provider appears to be > advertising that stusta.de doesn't use the mail relay you are using. From reading this thread, it's not clear to me which of two possible situations we are in: 1) The mail server is rejecting perfectly valid email based upon it requiring SPF or some similar problem with that mail server. 2) The mail server is rejecting email because SPF is misconfigured on the other end. I agree that an email address should not be in maintainers if it rejects email simply because a domain does not use SPF or correctly configures SPF such that the email should not be rejected (for example, by correctly saying that it cannot list all the possible sources of email from that domain). However, it is perfectly valid for it to drop emails based upon SPF that specifically says that the email is invalid, non-standard extension or not. If you choose to use the non-standard extension and specifically use it to communicate that certain emails are invalid, you have no right to complain that the emails you claimed were invalid are treated as such by others. DS