Claudio Jeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-11-10T00:00]: > First of all it is broken or breaks many valid applications. e.g. > forwarding does not work correctly and user that are forced to use > some smtp proxy will have issues too.
And then there are those who still believe open relays are the right thing to do, because mail has always worked that way in the past... SPF does break verbatim forwarding, yes, unless forwarders do some kind of envelope return path mangling (eg, SRS). Call it "taking responsibility for your outgoing mail". Actually, I don't think this is such a bad idea in general, even if it is not a perfect solution. > Additionally it is useless. Currently 90% of SPF verified traffic is > spam. Where did you get those numbers from? > SPF does not prevent spam it is a user verification system and it does > that very bad. Use crypto instead. SPF is *not* designed to prevent spam, it is designed to prevent domain forgery in envelope return paths. Different story. It certainly does no such thing as user verification. You might have misunderstood some of the concepts behind SPF. Cheers Dan -- Daniel Roethlisberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GnuPG Key ID 0x804A06B1 (DSA/ElGamal) _______________________________________________ swinog mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.init7.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
