Previously Ian Jackson wrote: > I'm strongly opposed to SPF, mainly because the technical details > are insane. See for example what I said in RISKS: > http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/23.18.html#subj10
Amusingly I encountered a SPF filter for the first time this week: a mailserver rejected an email from declaring it was spoofed. Only it didn't see that the mailserver that contact it was only relaying the message and was not the one I used. Only way to work around that for me: remove SPF records from DNS again. Wichert. -- Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> It is simple to make things. http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple.
