----- Original Message ----- From: "x" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> It's also possible that spammers will also create a new SPF of their own > >> until they are caught them create another. However, unless I really don't > >> understand the dynamics of it all, at least SPF has the promise of > >> getting > >> this spam issue under control a whole lot faster > > > > > > SPF is not anti-spam, it's anti-sender forgery > > > > Let me know when I can say: "no SPF records? then reject" > > > > never, SPF is broken as far as I am concerned > > it breaks forwards and it breaks some backup mx type stuff as well, you > have to tweak your MTA to get around it at the current time True, SRS/SES or something like it needs to be implemented at the forwarding site in order to not block legitimately forwarded messages. However, if you are not blocking outright via SPF, and are instead using it as part of a weighting system like Declude JunkMail and SpamAssassin do, then you can reduce the effect of false positive SPF forwarding failures by using the trustedforwarder DNSWL & RHSWL at http://www.trusted-forwarder.org in either Declude JunkMail or SpamAssassin. Since most here use Declude JunkMail, here are the rule entries to support these two trustedforwarder whitelists: TRUSTEDFORWARDER-DYNA ip4r wl.trusted-forwarder.org 127.0.0.2 -5 0 TRUSTEDFORWARDER-RHSBL rhsbl wl.trusted-forwarder.org 127.0.0.2 -5 0 If someone here is using SpamAssassin and would like the trustedforwarder rulesets for SA, let me know. Bill To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
