Quoting Tony Finch:
it won't hurt and it will tell the clueful ones that the spam is not sent by
It will hurt: you will no longer be able to email a significant proportion
of the users at many sites.
In theory, maybe, but you'll get notified (as long as nobody's
blackholing). In pratice, I
On Sat, 1 Apr 2006, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
2. Publish an SPF record. It won't help against the clueless mail admins but
it won't hurt and it will tell the clueful ones that the spam is not sent by
you.
It will hurt: you will no longer be able to email a significant proportion
of the users at
--On 3 April 2006 18:46:59 +0100 Tony Finch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 1 Apr 2006, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
2. Publish an SPF record. It won't help against the clueless mail admins
but it won't hurt and it will tell the clueful ones that the spam is not
sent by you.
It will hurt: you
måndag 03 april 2006 19:46 skrev Tony Finch:
On Sat, 1 Apr 2006, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
2. Publish an SPF record. It won't help against the clueless mail admins
but it won't hurt and it will tell the clueful ones that the spam is not
sent by you.
It will hurt: you will no longer be able
Hi !!
2. Publish an SPF record. It won't help against the clueless mail admins but
it won't hurt and it will tell the clueful ones that the spam is not sent by
you.
It will hurt: you will no longer be able to email a significant proportion
of the users at many sites.
this is of course
torsdag 02 mars 2006 19:19 skrev Gururajan Ramachandran:
If a standard email address becomes used extensively
by spammers and virus/worm emailers what can be done
about it? For example, an address like
[EMAIL PROTECTED] gets hijacked and generates
many bounce back emails. Can anything be
If a standard email address becomes used extensively
by spammers and virus/worm emailers what can be done
about it? For example, an address like
[EMAIL PROTECTED] gets hijacked and generates
many bounce back emails. Can anything be done about
this via exim, for example? Or is the only option to
