> That is a very, very important point that I hadn't seen come up
> before. That helps a *lot* with the "But spammers will just publish their
> own SPF records" argument.
please be serious. If a single vote saying a spam trap has been hit
would be sufficient to block an e-mail server, this would open up a
simple way to shut down virtually all e-mail traffic within minutes. You
wouldn't want that kind of DOS attack, would you?
And that is exactly why good RHSBLs are so rare.
But that is what SPF fixes. If you send an E-mail from
"postmaster(_at_)declude(_dot_)com" to a spamtrap, it is going to get a FAIL response,
so we won't get added to the RHSBL.
-Scott
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]
-------
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?¡