spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Re: step by step deploment

2004-01-22 09:01:39
On Thu, 2004-01-22 at 07:45 -0800, Thomas R. Stephenson wrote:
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?
  

Not cool with my users-- not many of them, anyway.

-------
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?¡


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>