On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 17:09:31 +0100
Per Jessen <p...@computer.org> wrote:
> > Tell you what, wouldn't it be a great idea to save all the messing
> > around and use something universal and simple for the job? Something
> > lightweight and easy to deploy. I know! What about using SPF!
>
> Christian, I suspect we don't have quite the same understanding of
> what 'easy' means.
I guess that is so.
Personally I find the multiple use of Postfixens trivial easy and have
it deployed that way to get over it's inability to whitelist body and
header checks {at all}. In general terms your fix may not suit
common MTA's like Exchange (I feel quite disgusted to have described
Exchange as an MTA and will now go and wash my typing fingers.....)
I did find a bad place to use SPF - and that is
on a well known spam filter made by an American company. Enable it there
and watch the machine grind to a halt..... 'it's a feature - not a bug'
LOL.... could'nt resist it... I'll get my coat......
>
>
> /Per Jessen, Zürich
>
