SPF Return-Path oder From Check?

Hallo Flo,

(Sorry, my German-speaking brain isn't creating thoughts at the moment. [:(])

I think the Dienstleister may be confused.  The SPF-check is done during the SMTP transaction and is based on the domain name in the MAIL FROM command issued by the sending server.  A long-standing feature request for the UTM has been the ability to separately and additionally check the From field in an email message.  The From field is optional and is sent after the DATA command is issued by the sending server.

MfG - Bob (Bitte auf Deutsch weiterhin.)

Hallo Flo,

(Sorry, my German-speaking brain isn't creating thoughts at the moment. [:(])

I think the Dienstleister may be confused.  The SPF-check is done during the SMTP transaction and is based on the domain name in the MAIL FROM command issued by the sending server.  A long-standing feature request for the UTM has been the ability to separately and additionally check the From field in an email message.  The From field is optional and is sent after the DATA command is issued by the sending server.

MfG - Bob (Bitte auf Deutsch weiterhin.)

Hey Bob,

yeah, that confused me, too.

His argument depends specifically on "When using "SRS" for redirections, than the receiving system should recognise this and check the return-path instead on mailfrom".

Or does UTM dont support SRS?

Can you say something about that constellation?

Thanks again.

Flo,

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sender_Rewriting_Scheme: Das Sender Rewriting Scheme (kurz SRS) ist eine Methode, um den Absender (genauer: den Envelope Sender) einer E-Mail so umzuschreiben, dass Sender Policy Framework (SPF) auch mit Mail-Umleitung funktioniert. 

MfG - Bob

Moin Bob,

nimm's mit nicht übel aber Google benutzen kann ich selbst und hab ich auch zu genüge getan.

Das hilft leider nicht, um meine Fragestellung zu beantworten.

@Douglas: Thank you. That informations are enough for now to answer my question about the functionality of SRS with a UTM. I dont think that there is a bug at this point because there are too less discussions for that theme.

LG,

Flo