On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 23:39 -0700, junkyardma...@verizon.net wrote:
> Very aware spammers can create their own domains and and SPF records. They
> can do essentially the same thing with any anti spam measures. And I have
> see a number of them do just that, an SPF record of entire IPv4 address
junkyardma...@verizon.net a écrit :
> Yahoo has ulterior motives? They wish to push their domain keys.
> Others probably likewise have ulterior motives.
> Do you also oppose SPF, and if so what is your motives?
I will repeat myself: this is not the place to discuss SPF. SPF has been
debated to d
son"
Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 11:43 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject: Re: [Postfix-Users] Re: Postfix.org SPF
On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 11:31:03PM -0700, junkyardma...@verizon.net wrote:
> What is your objection?
For the love of $deity *STOP* top-posting. Thank you.
You wanted an objection? There it is.
John
--
"Thinking impli
effective.
--
From: "Stan Hoeppner"
Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 10:58 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF
junkyardma...@verizon.net put forth on 7/4/2010 9:53 PM:
What is stupid is to be so opposed to anti spam tools that have no
significant downside.
The problem is it has n
What is your objection?
--
From: "John Levine"
Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 9:48 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF
Anyone opposed to the postfix.org domain publishing an SPF record?
Yes. Now, can you go away, please?
R'
junkyardma...@verizon.net put forth on 7/4/2010 9:53 PM:
> What is stupid is to be so opposed to anti spam tools that have no
> significant downside.
The problem is it has no significant upside either, which is why most sites
don't use it as an anti spam measure. Since spammers can simply create
>Anyone opposed to the postfix.org domain publishing an SPF record?
Yes. Now, can you go away, please?
R's,
John, MAAWG senior technical advisor, among other things
om: "Sahil Tandon"
Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 9:12 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF
On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 21:08:58 -0700, junkyardma...@verizon.net wrote:
[blah blah blah]
It is simply becoming unnecessary to accept email from domains which
do not publish an SPF record to let re
On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 21:08:58 -0700, junkyardma...@verizon.net wrote:
[blah blah blah]
> It is simply becoming unnecessary to accept email from domains which
> do not publish an SPF record to let receiving domains know the systems
> that are authorized to transfer email for them. And doing so c
horized to transfer email for them.
And doing so cuts into spam significantly.
--
From:
Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 7:51 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF
Yahoo has ulterior motives? They wish to push their domain keys.
Others probably likewise hav
On Sunday, July 04, 2010 10:51:32 pm junkyardma...@verizon.net wrote:
> Yahoo has ulterior motives? They wish to push their domain keys.
>
> Others probably likewise have ulterior motives.
>
> Do you also oppose SPF, and if so what is your motives?
>
Please stop. This is offtopic for this list
7:29 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF
On 07/04/2010 10:20 PM, junkyardma...@verizon.net wrote:
Some do not accept email from domains whose owner does not publish the
servers they authorize to transfer mail for their domain.
--
From: "Sahi
What is stupid is to be so opposed to anti spam tools that have no
significant downside.
Makes one wonder about true motives.
--
From: "Matt Hayes"
Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 7:29 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF
On 07/04/201
n"
Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 11:53 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF
On Sat, 2010-07-03 at 11:45:39 -0700, junkyardma...@verizon.net wrote:
How about publishing an SPF record for postfix.org.
Why?
--
Sahil Tandon
2010 11:53 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF
On Sat, 2010-07-03 at 11:45:39 -0700, junkyardma...@verizon.net wrote:
How about publishing an SPF record for postfix.org.
Why?
--
Sahil Tandon
Rejecting email souly on the fact that a domain doesn't publish an SPF
is stupid.
-Matt
on"
> Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 11:53 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF
>
>> On Sat, 2010-07-03 at 11:45:39 -0700, junkyardma...@verizon.net wrote:
>>
>>> How about publishing an SPF record for postfix.org.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>> --
>> Sahil Tandon
>
Some do not accept email from domains whose owner does not publish the
servers they authorize to transfer mail for their domain.
--
From: "Sahil Tandon"
Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 11:53 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF
On Sat,
Those who wish to make use of it can do so.
From: Jeroen Geilman
Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 11:46 AM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF
On 07/03/2010 08:45 PM, junkyardma...@verizon.net wrote:
How about publishing an SPF record for postfix.org.
This would
On Sat, 2010-07-03 at 11:45:39 -0700, junkyardma...@verizon.net wrote:
> How about publishing an SPF record for postfix.org.
Why?
--
Sahil Tandon
On 07/03/2010 08:45 PM, junkyardma...@verizon.net wrote:
How about publishing an SPF record for postfix.org.
This would work well:
"v=spf1 mx include:cloud9.net ~all"
http://openspf.org/
http://old.openspf.org/wizard.html?mydomain=Postfix.org
Um.. and then what ?
21 matches
Mail list logo
