Hello Daryl, [BTW, thanks to you and others for the direct response/cc in addition to the list posting. I get the list by digest, and so list-only responses don't get to me until the digest is released.]
Wednesday, March 9, 2005, 6:55:50 PM, you wrote: >> DCWOS> Don't forget about the new whitelist_from_spf capability that >> DCWOS> should be in the next major release. >> >> Not forgetting about it. Looking forward to it. However, hoping to >> have a first whitelist.cf file out before 3.1 is officially released, >> we can't very well include whitelist_from_spf rules in there, at least >> not immediately. DCWOS> Of course! I wasn't sure on the time line for this whitelist, DCWOS> or 3.1 for that matter. Not sure about 3.1, but hope to have the first release of the whitelist file out in a couple of weeks. DCWOS> I believe you'd need to use two separate if structures: if (version >>= 3.001000) DCWOS> whitelist_from_spf DCWOS> endif DCWOS> if (version < 3.001000) DCWOS> whitelist_from_rcvd DCWOS> endif Captured and will test/verify. Related question to anyone/everyone: I've been unable to get mass-check results on whitelist_from_rcvd ... I can test against individual emails using > spamassassin --prefs-file=file <testemail >outputfile but nothing I've done has gotten any results through mass-check and hit-frequencies. Is there a way to get hit-frequencies results from whitelist_from_rcvd? >> DCWOS> For info on whitelist_from_spf (and def_whitelist_from_spf) >> DCWOS> implementation see bug 3487. >> >> Thanks for the pointer. This functionality is active in the current >> svn bleeding edge version, yes? If so, then perhaps later this week I >> can download that and begin playing with it. DCWOS> I haven't commited it yet, but the latest patch in the bug will DCWOS> probably be what is used unless somebody thinks of something I DCWOS> missed. I'll probably proceed with whitelist.cf release 1 strictly on _rcvd then, to get it out this month, and will roll in _spf capabilities once it's stable. DCWOS> It'd be extremely unlikely that the actual rule form would change from DCWOS> what it is now: whitelist_from_spf [EMAIL PROTECTED] DCWOS> ...just like whitelist_from & blacklist_from. And that leads to the second question: what's the best way for an "end user" to obtain/verify SPF records? I have all the capabilities of XP (shudder) and Cygwin readily available, and can get Linux command-line capabilities via SSH to SARE's server, I believe. >> Rather than maintain the rules and then separately a list of domains, >> IMO it'd be easier to simply make sure the rules are ordered by domain >> name, and make the online link point to the rules file itself. >> >> I'd rather go to the slight extra effort of making the rules file more >> readable than try to keep two different files in sync. DCWOS> Well, if it comes to the point where you implement a database DCWOS> for submissions, you can automatically generate both the rules DCWOS> page and the submission page / duplication checks rather DCWOS> trivially. Good point! Bob Menschel
