Sigh. Unfortunately the "embrace and extend" philosophy has encouraged
that approach. Certain companies out there are so busy trying to
transmogrify network protocols into their warped software as a way of
gaining market lock-in that they give less weight to being compatible
with everyone other than their own crap.
Ted
On 4/23/2015 7:40 AM, Erik Kline wrote:
And yet the de facto behaviour in so many situations seems to be more
like "Be unreasonably paranoid in what you accept, and inexplicably
random in what you send."
:)
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt<[email protected]> wrote:
There is an RFC:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1122
Section 1.2.2 Robustness Principle
Ted
On 4/22/2015 8:40 AM, Frank Bulk wrote:
Glad to hear that Microsoft did this on their O365 platform.
Is there an RFC or other standard that we can point other email providers to
about implementing email admission in this manner?
Frank
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Bill Owens
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 8:08 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Looking for a Microsoft person who can help w/ v6 and Office365
email
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Bill Owens<[email protected]> wrote:
We've been running our Office365 mail account for a few weeks now with
IPv6 enabled. We went into this knowing that Microsoft was going to enforce
SPF checks on inbound mail, and we've run into a number of issues with
people sending mail over v6 transport and having bad SPF records (or none).
So far we've been able to resolve all but one of those issues, or are in the
process of doing so; that's not a big deal. The one that won't fix their
record is going to require us to resubscribe to a few mail lists, not the
end of the world.
However, we've discovered that there are sporadic failures even when there
are valid SPF records, and in some cases even when the email enters the
Microsoft 'world' using v4 and transitions to v6 between two Microsoft
servers - at which point the SPF check is applied even though the message
was "accepted" several hops prior, and the check sometimes fails. That's
something we can't fix on our own.
I don't know whether this is in response to the problems we've reported, but
Microsoft has changed their attitude towards SPF and
IPv6 just a little. Rather than returning a 5xx error code, which causes the
mail to bounce immediately, they're going to return 4xx
and allow the sender to attempt redelivery. This ought to prevent the
majority of bounces that we've been seeing, although it
doesn't fix the underlying issue(s) that cause the false SPF failures:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/tzink/archive/2015/04/18/office-365-will-slightly-modify-its-treatment-of-anonymous-inbound-email-over-ipv6.aspx
Bill.
