Jason Bertoch wrote:
On 2/25/2010 6:37 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
A lot of posts with useless rants on a personal grievance against SPF
Marc,
I suspect you're not seeing a bunch of supporters of SPF post on this
thread because most find it tiresome, bothersome, pointless, or all of
the above. I bit my lip until now for all of those reasons, but can't
stand your continual whining. You're clearly only mad at SPF because
of the forwarding issue. As has been stated in a multitude of threads
over the years, including this one, SPF has its place for those that
use it in the way it was intended.
Although, I agree that FCrDNS is very useful, I'm also aware that it's
just another tool in the box. For some unfortunate reason, many
providers don't allow changes to PTR records to accommodate their
customers. SPF provides an alternate means by which domain owners can
publish useful mail source information on their own, regardless of
provider cooperation/competence.
Forwarding off-site has essentially been deprecated since spam
filtering began and the wide-spread availability of mail submission
ports/relaying via authentication. SPF isn't your problem, it's your
ego. If you proxy your connections, like the rest of your [much]
bigger competitors do, the forwarding issue goes away. Or, if you
don't feel like coding, ask your customers to use the SPF include
directive where you can publish additional allowable servers. SPF
simply isn't the problem, please stop whining.
/out
The forward issue is definitely an annoyance. But SPF has a problem in
that as the supporters admit, it doesn't block spam, and it can't be
used as a white rule because spammers often use SPF correctly. I'm not
sure what you mean that forwarding has been depricated. Lots of people
forward email for a lot of different reasons. I don't understand what
you mean.
