If we could get the top 50 domains to start "punishing" non-SPF compliant
with delays and a gradual migration to a hard fail in unison, would that not
prompt other domains to become SPF compliant?
I'd imagine if the top 50 domains refused e-mail unless one was
wearing a funny hat you'd see a lot more people wearing funny hats.
But what effect that would have on spam per se, like SPF, is highly
questionable.
Right!!
SPF is one of the stupidest pieces of garbage I've seen get as far as it has...
evidence of to what absurd lengths people will go to APPEAR to be 'doing
something', even if it in fact doesn't solve the problem! (In fact, it does
VERY little to prevent spamming, and doesn't even really do anything much to
ensure that E-mail isn't forged.)
Maybe what OUGHT to happen is that systems worldwide ought to stop supporting,
or maybe "punish", SPF-oriented servers...!
Let's simply STOP the stupid, blind, ill-conceived rush into half-assed
"solutions" that AREN'T!!!
[snip]
OTOH, rate-limiting port 25 probably would be a reasonable compromise
if the rates were set reasonably.
Blocking (or throttling) port 25 only guarantees that SMTP servers will start
accepting mail on other, non-blocked, non-compromised ports.
Gordon Peterson http://personal.terabites.com/
1977-2002 Twenty-fifth anniversary year of Local Area Networking!
Support free and fair US elections! http://stickers.defend-democracy.org
12/19/98: Partisan Republicans scornfully ignore the voters they "represent".
12/09/00: the date the Republican Party took down democracy in America.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg