[mail-vet-discuss] Reworked section 2 (for -13)

[Dotzero]

On 3/11/08, Scott Kitterman <mail-vet-discuss at kitterman.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 March 2008 19:50:33 Dotzero wrote:
> > Murray,
> >
> > After reviewing section 2.4.3 I think it should be split out
> > separately for SPF and Sender-ID. A pass for SPF does not mean the
> > same thing as a pass for SIDF. Conflating the two is a recipe for
> > problems. Mail From pass from SPF is totally different from PRA pass
> > from SIDF.
> >
> Yes.  This is definitely true.
>
> Since PRA = From = Mail From about 80% of the time, it's an 80% solution.  80%
> is good enough for Microsoft (I guess).  Unless that's good enough for you,
> I'd say they ought to be disambiguated.
>

You forgot to include the % of time that PRA=Sender and not From.