In
<2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E01113353(_at_)mou1wnexm02(_dot_)vcorp(_dot_)ad(_dot_)vrsn(_dot_)com>
"Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker(_at_)verisign(_dot_)com> writes:
What receivers of email choose to consider worthy of accreditation
and/or reputation is up to them. I see little or no value in the
sender claiming accreditation.
SPEWS demonstrates the impossibility of accrediting the whole world to an
acceptable standard. MAPS failled, they have all failled.
I'm not sure what you mean by MAPS/SPEWS/etc. have "all failed". If,
by "failed" you mean "have eliminated spam", then I agree, they
haven't done that. But, SPF won't eliminate all spam either.
There are many DNSBLs that do a very good job of identifying a very
large percentage of spam with "low" false positive rates. DNSBLs,
both publicly available ones and internally developed ones, are very
widely used. While the false positive rates of many are too high to
use for direct blocking, they are often very useful when used as one
component of an overal spam score. DNSBLs are a good, but imperfect,
measure of reputation.
In this sense, I would say DNSBLs have been successful, although not
complete.
There is also clear cases where DNSBL listings have put enough
pressure on ISPs that they have terminated spammers when they wouldn't
have otherwise.
In this sense, I would say DNSBLs have been successful, although not
complete.
Receivers cannot check every accreditation service.
Agreed. That is why you should put the accreditation service in your
SPF record as an exists: mechanism today.
We are talking here about positive accreditation, not negative. Senders will
have relatively few accreditations, in most cases only one.
The exists: mechanism can deal with both positive and negative
repuations. The examples I gave in my first response to this thread
were:
exists:%{ir}.query.bondedsender.org
-exists:%{ir}.sbl.spamhaus.org
I still see absolutely no reason why there needs to be a new
mechanism. There is only the need to educate people about new and not
entirely obvious ways of using ones that have already been deployed in
the field.
-wayne
-------
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?¡