Scott Silva wrote: > on 9-24-2008 11:41 AM Ralph Angenendt spake the following: >> Scott Silva wrote: >>> AFAIR yahoo only looks for proper SPF records and then looks at >>> content so far. My users interact with them all the time. >> >> Out of curiosity: What happens if you don't have SPF records? >> >> Ralph > Initially when I had to deal with sending to yahoo I would get a mix of > mail dumping into the receivers spam box to downright rejections. Then it > moved completely to rejections. I have exec's that send mail to all the > big providers, usually to lawyers and lobbyists that are either too > clueless or too cheap to have a better mail system. Aol and yahoo at the > time just wanted SPF records and reverse DNS that resolves. I really love it. There were times, when more spam had correct spf records than ham had. And SPF breaks mails in funny ways, especially for mailing lists or just plain email forwarding. Yes, there's SRS which tries to unbreak that but that's like trying to staple the staple on the dirty handkerchief you used for the large flesh wound to stop the bleeding. The only problem SPF can solve is that it is easier for the *sender* to make it harder for others to use his domain name in forgeries. It doesn't solve any other problem. And people who reject mails because of SPF are plain stupid (IMNSHO). It can be used to score, yes, but it really doesn't do what most people think it does. DKIM looks like it is better thought through - at least it doesn't break mail as spectacularly as SPF does. Reverse DNS - I love it. Rejecting mails because of broken or non-existant DNS violates the mail RFCs, though. In my eyes obsessive anti spam regulations destroys that part of email which spammers didn't destroy yet. Ralph
Attachment:
pgpf5vgtXnDGo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
