summary: don't be surprised if AOL turns off the record over the weekend
or even the next week while they collate data. This is why it's
important that they hear from us "look, with just a few MTAs running SPF
we caught BIGNUM spams" so please report what numbers you can get
tomorrow.
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 09:45:47PM -0500, the Director of Anti-Spam
Operations At AOL wrote:
| So AOL is hearing some reports about issues like the person from pobox
| described. We may roll this back tomorrow especially considering the
| upcoming weekend. Keep in mind that we usually implement big changes
| like this for a period of hours and then roll back to see if we get
| calls. So don't be suprised if this comes out shortly. Also, don't be
| suprised if we re-implement it again too. This is a very good learning
| experience for AOL and everyone in the Internet email/antispam
| community. So don't be depressed if we roll back for a bit. :-)
|
I wrote to him:
Rolling back would be fine by me; we've learned a lot of interesting
things from the experiment. Tomorrow I'll give you some stats on how
many spams were blocked.
I've written to the major forwarding service providers (acm.org,
alumniconnections, etc) explaining what they will have to do to adapt.
(If anyone comes to you, send them to http://spf.pobox.com/emailforwarders.png)
In any case, speaking as the owner of a forwarding company, I can say
that the onus belongs on us. For our part, we'll roll out sender
rewriting tomorrow and there won't be any more problems with AOL ->
pobox -> SPF bounces. I've offered to help the other providers as well
but who knows how quickly they move. Rolling out, then back, then out
again is like warning shots across the bow, enough to galvanize them
without making them enemies of the whole thing.
I think it's good that AOL publishes the record now because it allows
SPF to ease in with relatively little breakage, with a kind of gorilla
argument to silence the technical critics who won't ever be satisfied
anyway.
Right now the number of SPF-enabled SMTP receivers is practically nil.
Anybody who got a bounce due to SPF is an early adopter, willing to cope.
If SPF had been more widely rolled out on the receiver end, people would
get riled up and say that SPF and AOL both were breaking things. Slow
and steady gives people get time to adjust. It's like silly putty: go
slowly and it flows, lean hard and it will snap.
Thanks again for being willing to do the experiment.
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.9.4.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡