> > most ISPs (and mail service providers like yahoo and hotmail), for instance, > will never have SPF records in their DNS. they may use SPF checking on their > own MX servers, but they won't have the records in their DNS. their users have > legitimate needs to send mail using their address from any arbitrary location, > which is exactly what SPF works to prevent.
This also applies to most hosting companies. If your ISP prevents outgoing SMTP (port 25) to other mail servers and you are forced to use your ISP's mail servers, then the "mail server" is not going to match that of your hosting account or domain name. Thus SPF fails again in this case. > SPF is useful and a *part* of the solution for *some* of the problem. it is > not a magic bullet. I feel SPF is not going to be implemented many placed not because people don't wont to reduce spam, but because SPF just won't work in many cases. In fact, depending on how you look at it, it doesn't reduce spam at ALL (phising is certainly bad, but that is a separate problem). Jas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
