Matt wrote: >>> on the recieving side server supporting SPF but its pretty widespread so >>> should have a very positive impact on your problem if >>> you arent already using it. The other good thing is its technically very >> I am not too sure. I have noticed about 800 or so spf hits in a year >> time on a count of 100000+ filtered spam. It seems very ineffective (< >> 1%). Besides didn't it break traditional forwarding? > > If you use it hopefully its less likely your messages will be marked > as SPAM. I doubt DKIM is any better at blocking SPAM. They both do > basically the same thing which is insure only authorized senders are > allowed to send messages for a given domain. > > Matt >
'insure'? Or just add yet-another layer of complexity? 'There was an old lady who swallowed a fly...' We keep looking for a buzz-phrase 'magic bullet' add-on when the most important tools have been in the original smtp RFC's for decades. Fixed-IP, proper DNS with correct MX and PTR RR, HELO with a FQDN that matches the records for the IP connecting, proper protocol handhskes & sequencing, correct envelope/header/message/attachment format and mime-type encoding... ... combine to do a better job, cheaper, and faster. Bill -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
