I don't believe in SPF, which is why we don't use it to check inbound mail. I do believe in being able to communicate with our customers irrespective of which provider they use, and given that Hotmail in particular is extremely unforgiving with respect to SPF, we have no choice but to publish such records.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeroen van Aart" <jer...@mompl.net> To: "nanog" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 2:11:43 PM Subject: Re: What must one do to avoid Gmail's retarded non-spam filtering? Erik L wrote: > Received-SPF: pass ... > Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass ... > > So the problem is unlikely to be a SPF issue, as mentioned in my first > e-mail. http://david.woodhou.se/why-not-spf.html The lack of SPF records should never be the reason to block an email. It's about time SPF is being laid to rest, it's broken, ineffective and a flawed concept. Well, it's effective in legitimising spammers and breaking forwarding for example, but otherwise... -- http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/ http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/plural-of-virus.html
