> On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 08:06 +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote: > > > else fight sender forgies in mta, and only accept spf pass, if sender > > domain is not with spf record count how many ham mails is comming from > > this domain, if none, then domain blacklist this sender, open again if > > there is spf later
On 25.08.09 07:44, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote: > Interesting quote regarding SPF and those that advocate it: > > "Except for the special case of bulk mail sender authentication by inbox > providers, no one with non-trivial operational responsibilities has > paid attention to SPF for several years. At this late date, advocating > SPF for anything except whitelist authentication, ridicule, or an object > lesson in letting marketing and personality cult outweigh reality is > trolling or proof of willful ignorance." well, both paragraphs above have some logical problems... -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Posli tento mail 100 svojim znamim - nech vidia aky si idiot Send this email to 100 your friends - let them see what an idiot you are
