Hello,
M. Fioretti pisze:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 10:14:31 AM -0800, Marc Perkel ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> >Everyone has different opinions on the usefulness of SPF, but the
> >reality of it is, DomainKeys solves the entire problem. SPF
> >doesn't.
>
> I second that. I've wasted a lot of time
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 10:14:31 AM -0800, Marc Perkel ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> >Everyone has different opinions on the usefulness of SPF, but the
> >reality of it is, DomainKeys solves the entire problem. SPF
> >doesn't.
>
> I second that. I've wasted a lot of time with SPF and it's useless.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matt wrote:
>> But as a matter of fact, I got corrected. The major problem with even
>> scoring is that the only things spammers have to do (and they really do
>> it!) is to register some new domain, enter valid SPF records for it and
>> then their sco
on 11/28/2007 10:46 AM Matt spake the following:
But as a matter of fact, I got corrected. The major problem with even
scoring is that the only things spammers have to do (and they really do
it!) is to register some new domain, enter valid SPF records for it and
then their scoring might even impr
> But as a matter of fact, I got corrected. The major problem with even
> scoring is that the only things spammers have to do (and they really do
> it!) is to register some new domain, enter valid SPF records for it and
> then their scoring might even improve.
DKIM and domainkeys are really no bet
on 11/28/2007 10:08 AM Udo Rader spake the following:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rick Romero wrote:
On Nov 28, 2007, at 11:26 AM, Dean Brooks wrote:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 11:06:40AM -0600, Matt wrote:
Your spf record is broken:
dovecot.org.39942 IN TX
On Nov 28, 2007, at 12:08 PM, Udo Rader wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rick Romero wrote:
On Nov 28, 2007, at 11:26 AM, Dean Brooks wrote:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 11:06:40AM -0600, Matt wrote:
Your spf record is broken:
dovecot.org.39942 IN TXT
Dean Brooks wrote:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 11:06:40AM -0600, Matt wrote:
Your spf record is broken:
dovecot.org.39942 IN TXT "v=spf1 a -all"
Care to tell also why? dovecot.org's mails are sent from the same IP as
its A record.
Hmmm. I would have li
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rick Romero wrote:
>
> On Nov 28, 2007, at 11:26 AM, Dean Brooks wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 11:06:40AM -0600, Matt wrote:
> Your spf record is broken:
>
> dovecot.org.39942 IN TXT "v=spf1 a -all"
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 11:45:29AM -0600, Rick Romero wrote:
> >>One thing that bugs me is why we must now implement domainkeys on top
> >>of SPF. SPF pretty much does everything domainkeys does but simpler.
> >
> >Because SPF is a broken hack that doesn't properly accomodate the
> >forwarding of
On Nov 28, 2007, at 11:26 AM, Dean Brooks wrote:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 11:06:40AM -0600, Matt wrote:
Your spf record is broken:
dovecot.org.39942 IN TXT "v=spf1 a -all"
Care to tell also why? dovecot.org's mails are sent from the same
IP as
its A record.
Hmmm.
> > One thing that bugs me is why we must now implement domainkeys on top
> > of SPF. SPF pretty much does everything domainkeys does but simpler.
>
> Because SPF is a broken hack that doesn't properly accomodate the
> forwarding of email without the use of other complicating hacks
> such as SRS w
(Dean, sorry you'll see this twice...I forget that the Dovecot list,
unlike every other list I'm subscribed to, does not "reply to list" by
default...)
Dean Brooks wrote:
> Everyone has different opinions on the usefulness of SPF, but the
> reality of it is, DomainKeys solves the entire problem.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 11:06:40AM -0600, Matt wrote:
> > > Your spf record is broken:
> > >
> > > dovecot.org.39942 IN TXT "v=spf1 a -all"
> >
> > Care to tell also why? dovecot.org's mails are sent from the same IP as
> > its A record.
>
> Hmmm. I would have listed mx as
On Nov 28, 2007, at 11:06 AM, Matt wrote:
Your spf record is broken:
dovecot.org.39942 IN TXT "v=spf1 a -all"
Care to tell also why? dovecot.org's mails are sent from the same
IP as
its A record.
Hmmm. I would have listed mx as well but thats just me. But just
l
> > Your spf record is broken:
> >
> > dovecot.org.39942 IN TXT "v=spf1 a -all"
>
> Care to tell also why? dovecot.org's mails are sent from the same IP as
> its A record.
Hmmm. I would have listed mx as well but thats just me. But just
listing a is likely better in that t
11/28/2007 7:17 AM Jim Flowers spake the following:
Your spf record is broken:
dovecot.org.39942 IN TXT "v=spf1 a -all"
--
Jim Flowers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Checking to see if there is a valid SPF record.
Found v=spf1 record for dovecot.org
v=spf1 a -all
evaluating...
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 11:17 -0400, Jim Flowers wrote:
> Your spf record is broken:
>
> dovecot.org.39942 IN TXT "v=spf1 a -all"
Care to tell also why? dovecot.org's mails are sent from the same IP as
its A record.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed mes
Your spf record is broken:
dovecot.org.39942 IN TXT "v=spf1 a -all"
--
Jim Flowers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
19 matches
Mail list logo
