Rich Kulawiec wrote:
On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 12:58:24PM +1100, Matthew Sullivan wrote:
Seems a lot of people forgot what SPF gives/does not give.
I'm well aware of SPF (and DKIM, and SenderID). Whatever their
theoretical merits, I don't consider them worthy of serious operational
consideration, as spammers/phishers already have the ability to render
them moot whenever it pleases them to do so. But regardless of that
debate, which is arguably off-topic here, I don't believe they should
be mentioned in a BCP about DNSBLs.
Agreed: SPF is out of scope for the document despite it being DNS-based,
as is, for example, filtering based on the presence or absence of
PTRs/rDNS. It's so far out of scope that it's probably not worth the
bits to declare it out of scope.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg