Mailing List Archive: incorrect Received-SPF format

incorrect Received-SPF format

Mar 26, 2007, 7:15 PM

Post #1 of 11 (8877 views)

All this time, I've been generating Received-SPF header fields, and I've
been doing it wrong. I was just emulating what I've seen elsewhere, but just
got through checking RFC4408 :-( Here is what I output currently:

2007Mar26 21:37:14 [8573] Received-SPF: permerror include:sbcglobal.net
(mail.bmsi.com: permanent error in processing domain of barbara.com: No
valid SPF record for included domain: sbcglobal.net)
client_ip=210.213.146.37; envelope_from="xiao-linkl@barbara.com";
helo=localhost.localdomain; receiver=mail.bmsi.com;
problem="include:sbcglobal.net"; mechanism=~all; identity=mailfrom

Putting the problem mechanism after the result is no longer allowed
in RFC4408. I'm pretty sure it was there in earlier drafts. Furthermore,
the spec requires camel case capitalization (provides literals for
result). So, it should look like this instead:

2007Mar26 21:37:14 [8573] Received-SPF: PermError (mail.bmsi.com: permanent
error in processing domain of barbara.com: No valid SPF record for
included domain: sbcglobal.net) client_ip=210.213.146.37;
envelope_from="xiao-linkl@barbara.com"; helo=localhost.localdomain;
receiver=mail.bmsi.com; problem="include:sbcglobal.net";
mechanism=~all; identity=mailfrom

But I guess the parser I'm about to write should be able to handle the old
way also.

--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart@bmsi.com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007

Re: incorrect Received-SPF format [ In reply to ]

julian at mehnle

Mar 27, 2007, 3:18 AM

Post #2 of 11 (8709 views)

Permalink

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
> Furthermore, the spec requires camel case capitalization (provides
> literals for result).

No:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4234#page-5

RFC 4234 ABNF grammar strings are case-insensitive.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGCO+UwL7PKlBZWjsRArfcAJ9u1AWS8mGkr47Bg3HUKSkqrS5zqQCg46d4
vfw0m3Oq4hLGEda/iwbi3k4=
=CKb7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007

Re: Re: incorrect Received-SPF format [ In reply to ]

stuart at bmsi

Mar 27, 2007, 7:51 AM

Post #3 of 11 (8688 views)

Permalink

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Julian Mehnle wrote:

> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4234#page-5
>
> RFC 4234 ABNF grammar strings are case-insensitive.

Thanks. But it looks nicer now anyway. :-)

--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart@bmsi.com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007

Re: incorrect Received-SPF format [ In reply to ]

nobody at xyzzy

Mar 27, 2007, 11:25 AM

Post #4 of 11 (8710 views)

Permalink

Stuart D. Gathman wrote:

>> RFC 4234 ABNF grammar strings are case-insensitive.

> Thanks. But it looks nicer now anyway. :-)

However RFC 4234 does not say that "-" is the same as "_":

You can say cLieNt-Ip but not client_ip. In your example
was also an envelope_from instead of an envelope-from (?)

Frank

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007

Re: Re: incorrect Received-SPF format [ In reply to ]

stuart at bmsi

Mar 27, 2007, 1:36 PM

Post #5 of 11 (8682 views)

Permalink

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Frank Ellermann wrote:

> However RFC 4234 does not say that "-" is the same as "_":
>
> You can say cLieNt-Ip but not client_ip. In your example
> was also an envelope_from instead of an envelope-from (?)

Arrrgh. Thanks again.

--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart@bmsi.com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007

Re: Re: incorrect Received-SPF format [ In reply to ]

stuart at bmsi

Mar 27, 2007, 1:51 PM

Post #6 of 11 (8707 views)

Permalink

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:

> > You can say cLieNt-Ip but not client_ip. In your example
> > was also an envelope_from instead of an envelope-from (?)
>
> Arrrgh. Thanks again.

2007Mar27 16:14:00 [7091] Received-SPF: PermError (mail.bmsi.com: permanent
error in processing domain of novoe-a.net: empty domain:)
client-ip=63.175.28.197; envelope-from="bounce-5D20872E64@novoe-a.net";
helo=novoe-d.net; receiver=mail.bmsi.com; problem="a:";
identity=mailfrom; x-helo-spf=permerror;

2007Mar27 16:46:15 [16] Received-SPF: None (mail.bmsi.com: 209.135.64.116 is
neither permitted nor denied by domain of nexinnovations.com)
client-ip=209.135.64.116;
envelope-from="Lorne.Roneki@nexinnovations.com";
helo=misns02.nexinnovations.com; receiver=mail.bmsi.com;
mechanism=mx/24; identity=mailfrom; x-bestguess=pass; x-helo-spf=pass;

--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart@bmsi.com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007

Re: incorrect Received-SPF format [ In reply to ]

nobody at xyzzy

Mar 27, 2007, 2:37 PM

Post #7 of 11 (8673 views)

Permalink

Stuart D. Gathman wrote:

>> Arrrgh. Thanks again.

What's that, you fixed it 15 minutes later ? :-)

> 2007Mar27 16:14:00 [7091] Received-SPF: PermError (mail.bmsi.com: permanent
> error in processing domain of novoe-a.net: empty domain:)
> client-ip=63.175.28.197; envelope-from="bounce-5D20872E64@novoe-a.net";
> helo=novoe-d.net; receiver=mail.bmsi.com; problem="a:";
> identity=mailfrom; x-helo-spf=permerror;

If problem="something" is a good idea we should add it to 4408bis.
I think it's clear in the spec. that new parameters are expected
to be defined (or to be tested, using x-name=value)

Frank

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007

Re: incorrect Received-SPF format [ In reply to ]

julian at mehnle

Mar 27, 2007, 2:52 PM

Post #8 of 11 (8700 views)

Permalink

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Frank Ellermann wrote:
> Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
> > 2007Mar27 16:14:00 [7091] Received-SPF: PermError (mail.bmsi.com:
> > permanent error in processing domain of novoe-a.net: empty domain:)
> > client-ip=63.175.28.197;
> > envelope-from="bounce-5D20872E64@novoe-a.net"; helo=novoe-d.net;
> > receiver=mail.bmsi.com; problem="a:"; identity=mailfrom;
> > x-helo-spf=permerror;
>
> If problem="something" is a good idea we should add it to 4408bis.
> I think it's clear in the spec. that new parameters are expected
> to be defined (or to be tested, using x-name=value)

We can do that without problems. No pun intended. However, "problem" may
not be the best name. Perhaps: syntax-error-in="a:"?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGCZIdwL7PKlBZWjsRAtj2AKCtQPajb6uCzosNohXx0LqZQHwr/ACfZz/t
6QDG8tiPJM5oCB9OQCTEEzg=
=GvCR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007

Re: Re: incorrect Received-SPF format [ In reply to ]

stuart at bmsi

Mar 27, 2007, 8:31 PM

Post #9 of 11 (8682 views)

Permalink

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Frank Ellermann wrote:

> If problem="something" is a good idea we should add it to 4408bis.
> I think it's clear in the spec. that new parameters are expected
> to be defined (or to be tested, using x-name=value)

I got problem= from 4408. No need to add it to 4408bis.

key = "client-ip" / "envelope-from" / "helo" /
"problem" / "receiver" / "identity" /
mechanism / "x-" name / name

--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart@bmsi.com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007

Re: Re: incorrect Received-SPF format [ In reply to ]

stuart at bmsi

Mar 27, 2007, 8:33 PM

Post #10 of 11 (8667 views)

Permalink

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Julian Mehnle wrote:

> > If problem="something" is a good idea we should add it to 4408bis.
> > I think it's clear in the spec. that new parameters are expected
> > to be defined (or to be tested, using x-name=value)
>
> We can do that without problems. No pun intended. However, "problem" may
> not be the best name. Perhaps: syntax-error-in="a:"?

"problem" is the name specified by 4408 in 7.7. Too late.

--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart@bmsi.com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007

Re: incorrect Received-SPF format [ In reply to ]

nobody at xyzzy

Mar 28, 2007, 9:00 AM

Post #11 of 11 (8681 views)

Permalink

Stuart D. Gathman wrote:

> I got problem= from 4408. No need to add it to 4408bis.

Thanks, you found a serious bug in my RFC 2324 implementation,.. <g>

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007