On Wednesday, March 2, 2005, 1:01:31 PM, A. wrote:
<snip/> >> which is why I think spf won't make it. AC> If port 587 is enabled and used as it should, there's no problem. Beyond AC> that, port 587 guarded by AUTH also permits roaming users. Otherwise they AC> often have to change their mail settings each time they plug into a new AC> network. Some services, like Shaw, have internal mail servers which aren't AC> even visible to the outside world. AC> If we have to get 587 up and running for roaming users, then why on Earth AC> wouldn't SPF be a natural extension of that? I mean, if you want your AC> customers to send through your mail system to guarantee that it will work AC> whether they're in Chicago, Paris or Tokyo, then popping an SPF record on AC> your domain is just an added way of giving the client's messages a leg-up. Hrmm... In practice I find that SPF is not useful for clearing messages, but it may be useful for stopping messages. See SPFFAIL and SPFPASS... http://www.sortmonster.com/MDLP/MDLP-Example-Long.html According to these measurements if you us SPF to kill bad messages then you're probably going to do ok - Accuracy is about 90%. However, if you use SPF to tell you what a good message is you will not have a lot of luck - 66% of the time you will be wrong. So, SPF is not good for giving your email a leg up, but it might be good evidence for fending off joe-jobs, and for keeping out about 7% of the bad stuff. _M To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
