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

Mark Tranchant wrote:
> > Sender authentication should be done in the client - not in the ISP.
>
> The disadvantage of doing it that way is wasted bandwidth - the forged 
> messages need to be sent to your client.
To cite an example, I know of at least one business in Russia (a bank) 
that pays alot for their bandwidth and the sys.admin. there chooses to 
implement strategies like milter-sender and SPF to block mail before the 
whole message content is received to avoid wasting the bandwidth and 
money. They don't bother with content filters because they've paid for 
the bandwith.
North America has flat rate local calls, but European businesses don't 
so the bigger and more email that is sent for some, the more money its 
costs them. These people want solutions that allow them to make 
judgements about the source of email and the reputation of senders. SPF 
is part of that framework.
--
Anthony C Howe                                 +33 6 11 89 73 78
http://www.snert.com/       ICQ: 7116561         AIM: Sir Wumpus

"...simplicity is a goal of good design,
                     it is never the starting point." - Dan Geer

-------
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?¡