Re: Lawsuits, angry business users, and SPF stupidity.

On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 11:23:00PM +1100, Chris Drake wrote:
> Just because you can't, after a few seconds of deliberation, think of
> a reason why you might need to accept email from me (or anyone not
> using SPF, or anyplace that SPF wrongly blocked) doesn't mean you
> won't in future.  Pretend you own a business, and don't just use email
> for your friends, and you're selling stuff on the internet (widgets
> that you sell 1 per week of, each making you $10,000 profit).  How
> happy are you going to be using SPF to automatically erase incoming
> emails from strangers?
Nobody will ever force you or anyone else to enable SPF checks in your MTA
or SPF rules in your DNS records. Nobody will ever force you or anyone else
to choose an ISP that does these things for you without an opt-out option.

> If you cannot understand why SPF needs to go away ASAP, you should at
> least not be helping to spread it around!
Even if the entire world adopts SPF tomorrow, you will always have the
option not to trash "fail" results. And for a reasonable part of your
$40K/month I'll even offer you a mail server that won't check for SPF
results, in case no other ISP could offer you that.

If you don't understand how SPF is completely optional on both the sending
as receiving end, you should probably not lash out at SPF.

Regards,

Rob
-- 
Rob Kaper     | Fate fell short this time, your smile fades in the summer
cap(_at_)capsi(_dot_)com | Place your hand in mine, I'll leave when I wanna
www.capsi.com |   -- "Feeling This", Blink 182

-------
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_)½§Åv¼ð¦¾Øß´ëù1Ií-»Fqx(_dot_)com

pgpTGylyGufdZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature