On 03/03/2018 07:47 AM, Stroller wrote:
My recollection is that I read this isn't that beneficial - that a policy
of ~ is adequate.
I'm guessing that you're referring to SPF's "~all" policy.
Why, as a domain owner that knows for a fact where messages are sent
from, want to allow for the possibility of someone else spoofing
messages as my domain to be "…accepted but tagged…"?
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sender_Policy_Framework)
I run the servers, I know the email infrastructure, I *KNOW* how email
is supposed to flow. So why give anyone an in rode?
Further, I accept any and all responsibility for the SPF record that I
publish blocking any legitimate email that I (*) send. The onus is on
me if I break delivery of email that I send.
* I do not consider messages from me re-sent by mailing lists to be
messages that I send. I say this because my email infrastructure does
NOT connect to any of the mailing list subscribers receiving email
infrastructure. IMHO the mailing list is sending a /new/ message to
those recipients. Said message just happens to be strongly based on a
message that I sent.
Finally, each and every single email administrator / domain owner / etc
is allowed to configure their systems as they see fit. If they (or I)
want to do something that will shoot them (or me) in the foot, who am I
(or you) to stop them (or me) from doing so?
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
