On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 03:37:10PM -0800, Dan Wilder wrote: > > > > ...which is not the recommendation of SPF. The default assumption is, > > "no SPF record == bad, evil spammer." > > Yuck! You sure about that!?! >
>From http://spf.pobox.com/objections.html : Domains that refuse to publish SPF or publish global-allow SPF out of political principle, malice, or incompetence will simply have to accept the penalty of a higher spam score. My fifty megs of spam a month outweighs your one curmudgeonly tirade. Domains who do this are the same domains who run open relays. They have deliberately chosen to go against the flow, and I can deliberately choose not to accept mail from them. I respect toad.com for taking a principled stand, and I hope they will publish an SPF "allow" record for the same reason they're an open relay. (full disclosure: I know a few people involved with toad.com. However, I don't agree with their running of an open relay). -- Mark C. Langston Sr. Unix SysAdmin [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems & Network Admin SETI Institute http://bitshift.org http://www.seti.org
