Re: Lawsuits, angry business users, and SPF stupidity.

On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 11:31:38PM +1100, Chris Drake wrote:

| Hi Wechsler,
| 
| At least *try* to understand my point if you're going to call me a
| "ranter".  Go back and read what I said again, and try to put yourself
| in the shoes of a business email user instead of someone who doesn't
| treat email as a serious tool.

It's really hard to put myself in the shoes of someone who wants everything
to remain stagnant.

It's really hard to put myself in the shoes of someone who does not want
to find new money making business models in a changing technical landscape.


| Your SPF idea is something that ISPs *are* going to use to block
| emails without sender and recipient permission - you can avoid the
| blame if you want, but it's *you* that is arming them with more tools
| to destroy the usefulness of email.  And you know perfectly well that
| SMTP level blocking is going to be either "on" or "off" for 90%+ of
| ISPs that implement it, so users will not get a choice to avoid this.

So why don't you "rant" at the ISPs themselves and tell them about all
the problems THEY will have if they use SPF?  You and I both know you
have the right to speak your mind, but don't you think it would be more
effective if you spoke to those who are making the decisions to either
use, or not use, SPF, rather than trying to convince the convention of
bishops that God does not exist?


| You should be working on a standard that USERS can ALWAYS opt out of.

They can opt out of it.  Maybe you should study it more closely.


| You wrote "SPF was initially proposed by a remailer service."... well,
| go on then: explain to me step-by-step how this "remailer service" is
| going to allow me to send my email from my hotmail.com address to
| someone whos ISP uses SPF?   Oh yes - and in case it needed saying,
| lets pretend that Microsoft refuse to list your remaillers IP address
| in any of their DNS servers...

When I get email from hotmail, it comes from an email address that says
"someuser(_at_)hotmail(_dot_)com".  The SMTP client is also one that hotmail.com
would put in their SPF specification, if they choose to use it.  So the
mail would get through just fine.

Maybe they will publish this policy.  I think that might work:

hotmail.com. IN TXT "v=spf1 ptr:hotmail.com ptr:msn.com ?all"

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Phil Howard KA9WGN       | http://linuxhomepage.com/      http://ham.org/ |
| (first name) at ipal.net | http://phil.ipal.org/   http://ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.9.4.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your 
subscription, 
please go to 
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡