On 22 Jan 2004 ty lammy <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com> wrote:
There have been some good RFC holy wars over rejecting invalid HELOs
but suffice to say these days it's probably a good idea. But in
practice it will reject a whole lot of mail from valid sites (with,
IMO, poorly configured mailers). When I was rejecting i'd estimate 95%
of the invalid EHLOs were spam.
Is a 5% false alarm rate acceptable to the users? management? anybody?
Thomas R. Stephenson, CPL Phone: (408) 742-3308
Lockheed Martin Technical Operations
MILSTAR Logistics Engineering O/M5-41 B/158
P.O. Box 61687 Sunnyvale, CA 94088-1687
Member Pegasus Mail Support Team
Thought for the day:
Everyone should be a non-conformist.
-------
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?¡