----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Atkins" <steve(_at_)blighty(_dot_)com>
"MX 0 ." seems to be the standard way of asserting that a domain
neither sends nor receives email. Shoehorning the same assertion
into multiple different pseudo-standards simply leads to contradiction.
MX is about INBOUND. Not Outbound Mail. That would only cover a possible
"no don't receive mail" policy. But I doubt this MX 0 is widely supported.
The attempts I have researched shows very low usage and if found, it is
mixed used with other non MX 0 statements. I hope this does not begin to
chip away at SSP.
I don't see why people would pay any more attention to an SSP
statement of such than they do to SPF statements of it. Just the
opposite, shoehorning unneeded cruft into SSP makes it less likely
that people will pay any attention to it, I'd think.
Steve, the SPF example was just an example to Stephen, that such a "No
(Outbound) Mail expected" concept does exist and is used in practice. If
AltaVista.com can do it, so can others. I can tell you that we will add a
NO MAIL POLICY to atleast 3-4 of our own domains if SSP was to become part a
new wide adopted practice. We have no problem protecting local policy when
the spoofs come out way. It is to expose to the external world not to
expect and accept such spoofs.
--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html