On 2024-05-09 at 17:21:07 UTC-0400 (Fri, 10 May 2024 07:21:07 +1000)
Noel Butler <noel.but...@ausics.net>
is rumored to have said:

> So what? domain owners state hard fail it SHOULD be hard failed, irrespective 
> of if YOU think you know better than THEM or not, if we hardfail we accept 
> the risks that come with it.

In principle, that is fine (as a demonstration of why some principles are 
pointless and do more harm than good...)

In practice, there is a prioritizing of whose wishes I prioritize on the 
receiving systems I work with. If my customer wants to receive the mail and the 
individual generating the mail is not generating that desire fraudulently, I 
don't care much about what the domain owner says. I do not work for the domain 
owners of the world and I am not obligated to enforce their usage rules on 
their users. Obviously I take their input seriously when trying to detect fraud 
but I've seen too many cases of "-all" being used with incomplete or obsolete 
lists of "permitted" hosts to accept that they know all of the places their 
mail gets generated.

I've also given up all hope of getting the few places that are still doing 
transparent forwarding to adopt SRS or any other mechanisms to avoid SPF 
breakage to ever change. There is no ROI in trying to fix such cases 
individually but users still want their college email addresses to work decades 
after graduating and some colleges have pandered to them. So have some 
professional orgs.


-- 
Bill Cole
b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Not Currently Available For Hire

Reply via email to