Le mercredi 4 Août 2004 01:49, Douglas Otis a écrit :
- Question : SPF currently has the extremely useful and flexible "exists"
mechanism, that, combined with its built-in macro-expansion, allows for
designing very fine-grained and flexible exceptions to the general SPF
rule for a given domain, i.e. per user and subnet.
If using CSV, any exceptions would be per hostname. As an alternative to
using the exists, which checks for yet another DNS record, simply set up
differing subdomains with different rules. [...]
They could also setup a subdomain that adds this new domain.
When you buy a pair of shoes, do you actually look for shoes that fit right to
your feet, of do you try to force your feet into a given pair ?
A technical solution needs to fit with user needs. You can't ask a company
"Oh, you just need to change the way your email system works, create a dozen
of subdomains, change all of your email addresses, and print new business
cards, and then it will be right for CSV".
SPF allows a kind of flexibility that permits adapting the SPF records to the
existing infrastructure, far better than having to adapt the infrastructure
to fit the requirements of the new authentication system.
If a MARID system (any flavour) necessitates that a number of domains have to
change their infrastructure architecture significantly for using it, it will
be a show-stopper.
The advantage of current blacklist systems is that no one has to pay for
getting blacklisted ;-) and, if some blacklists are commercial, such as
MAPS, you need to pay to use and query them, not to be listed in them or
not...
What? There is no relationship between a MAPS client and those that get
listed. There are several large ISPs that would testify to that! The
millions of dollars spent servicing legal defenses (never going anywhere)
forced MAPS into a paid service.
I never said that there was a relationship between MAPS clients and those that
get listed. You completely misunderstood my meaning, or I didn't express
myself clearly enough (sorry, english is not my language...).
(Parenthese:
BTW, my own perfectly static and never-spammed IP got listed by MAPS-DUL last
month. It was unlisted within 24 hours after I complained, but it _did_ cause
me trouble, and for all the users of the domains I manage as well.
A friend's perfectly static IP (at the other end of France) got listed by
MAPS-DUL the same day, but it took him more than a week to in the end get
unlisted. He was really, but really, really pissed off with this.
End of off-topic parenthese)
--
Michel Bouissou <michel(_at_)bouissou(_dot_)net> OpenPGP ID 0xDDE8AC6E