On 8/4/06, Arvel Hathcock <arvel(_dot_)hathcock(_at_)altn(_dot_)com> wrote:
> Yes but.. I don't think that everyone is going to be aware of the risk
> or ignore it thinking it can't happen to them.
Quite the contrary really, I'd think. And anyway, are we to remove from our
work even useful things on the basis that there are some who might not
understand it? Surely not. We should just do our best to document what we can
to help them.
Nothing contrary about it... I wish I had a nickle for everyone that
set their SPF records with a ~all. I also think that this would be of
diminishing returns. They may set it up this way.. but the first
problem (or second) they have, it will get turned off. Then what is
their alternative? I don't dislike the idea and if it were released
this way... at least I could say I told you so. I am just hoping we
can come up with a solution that will have a safety or 'Plan B'
attached.
Regards,
Damon Sauer
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html