On Mittwoch, 22. März 2006 00:11 Sander Holthaus wrote: > and it wouldn't surprise me > if actively rejecting SPF-fails has the similar effects as strict > RFC-enforcement or double reverse DNS-lookup. Lots less spam and lots > more false positives.
No, because 1) by forcing strict RFC, lots of HAM will be rejected, because lots of mailserver server is broken 2) 2revDNS just checks for the names whereas 3) SPF is quite easy to setup, and easy to check and control. Mailserver software is not touched, and it "just" breaks forwarding, so you have to allow all hosts that forward for your domain. That said, today I had another strange effect with SPF, where a mailing list on an SPF domain forwarded to it's users, some of them having redirections to other hosts which rejected the mail. But that was a misconfig, not the fault of SPF. I use SPF since quite a while, and it works well. I just got one report that mpay24.com has a mail list server which doesn't retry after a 4xx, but that's their problem. I reported them, they ignore it. Thats life. mfg zmi -- // Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc --- it-management Michael Monnerie // http://zmi.at Tel: 0660/4156531 Linux 2.6.11 // PGP Key: "lynx -source http://zmi.at/zmi2.asc | gpg --import" // Fingerprint: EB93 ED8A 1DCD BB6C F952 F7F4 3911 B933 7054 5879 // Keyserver: www.keyserver.net Key-ID: 0x70545879
pgpNd6qLAqqLR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
