RE: SPF Implementation with IMS

[Zaxalon Webmaster]

I wrote a version of AVP that supported an early specification for SPF, but they rewrote the darn spec practically every day I was implementing it, and in increasingly complicated ways, and I became quite frustrated.  I have not released it, even though it does include functionality equivalent to CheckMX as well (the real CheckMX plugin on SICA works well, although it seems to GPF a lot.)   Anyhow, there are several free source libraries posted for SPF available now, but none were quite pluggable enough or support purely NT 4.0 APIs, which a lot of people running IMS are using.   Its something I hope to revisit, but probably as part of complete replacement for SMTPRCV ported to VS.NET, with built-in AV capabilities, at some point later down the road.   Regards,   -- Eric   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Baumgratz Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2004 10:34 AM To: imsusers@rockliffe.com Subject: Re: SPF Implementation with IMS   Gordon, I had read some of your previous postings regarding the subject - how is the progress?  Just trying to strike up some constructive talks here to see how things are progressing with newer mail filtering techniques.  As for bringing up the SPF project, I am not really famililar with the project or the persons doing the work or biased in any way, I just happened to see in a DNS check at dnsreport.rom that the particular site was not registered with SPF and should probably do so by October of this year.  I was just looking to see if something is headed toward a standard or popular trend... Greg Gordon Fecyk wrote: Is anyone doing work on this (specifically Klint as he has been handling the SMTP receiver lately) to implement any such filters?  Here's some info for anyone interested: http://spf.pobox.com/ there is some interesting reading there.       Bear in mind that I have strong opinions of SPF's "inventor," for reasons noted elsewhere.  However, the IETF working group called MARID's doing the real, um, I guess you could call it work, which happens between the bickering.   <http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/index.html>   Somewhere are references to the documents drafted so far.