Hello,
My initial email had a small PS attached to it to try to avoid fruitless discussion about the patch on the list and being told that "the work of porting the patch was not worth the effort"
Thank you no one told me that (yet) ;-)
IMHO, yes, spf is not perfect and yes, it can cause problem. Still I can see case where it can help. Before taking your pen to tell me that I did not do my homework, I will let you know that I agree with most of the idea presented on http://homepages.tesco.net/~J.deBoynePollard/FGA/smtp-spf-is-harmful.html
I do believe that like qmail which will never be used by some people due to its licence, some of you will never apply a spf patch to their mail server (for x or y reason).
Qmail-ldap is not for everyone who need a mail server. SPF is not for everyone neither. I would recommend people who want to use it, to _carefully_ read about it and understand what their are doing before doing it.
However, it happen that spf is "the best solution available" to what some of my customers are asking me to provide. In the meanwhile, I am not aware of a better solution. And /my opinion/ is that in /my situation/ ,which I did not explained so please refrain to tell me that I am wrong, spf have a use.
Using SPF on my mail server do not mean that I will publish spf record for my customers DNS entries, or my own domains. But if someone is willing me to tell me via DNS block _their_ email, I have no issue with that as long as they leave mine pass.
Should you now want to tell me that I am wrong, feel free but unless you find a better solution to my customer problem, your comment are likely to find an deaf ear.
Regards,
Thomas Mangin
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
