-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Apr 20, 2004 at 04:34:03PM -0700, Tim Rice wrote:
>Isn't it the job of the MTA to reject messages that don't match >the SPF rules? Yes. If I remember right, SpamAssassin still wants to check it and take it into account anyway. It's in the next version. Until that happens, I have a script I run after SA to try to figure it out, and I have TMDA hold messages that fail their checks. Out of 6044 messages that were either held or confirmed this month, 18 were held because of SPF check failures. The SPF rule only applies to messages that SA scored under ten points and less than 99% for Bayes, so it's possible that other (higher scoring) messages failed SPF checks also. Numbers for last month are similar. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the SPF support for Postfix is for v2 only. I'm still on v1, and I'm scared of upgrading (and a little embarrassed to admit it). - -- Kyle Hasselbacher A wiseass without wisdom is just an ass. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAhfxU10sofiqUxIQRAnwaAKDJne9IdWm/4lcRaz/h9GdKcOyU2wCg1u2Q WPZXTNrorz/1a/P7iaVQenU= =SYnh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _________________________________________________ tmda-workers mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-workers
