spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

two kinds of responses to SPF

2004-01-27 16:12:45
On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 10:38:59AM -0800, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
| 
| I do not need a list of reasons why we are bound to fail from people who
| refuse to believe that there is even a problem.
| 

SPF conversations tend to fall into two groups.

Group 1:

  "Hi, we're SPF.  We're here to fix email."

  "No, you're breaking email!"

  "Well, yes, but it was broken before.  We're making it less broken."

  "It's not broken!  Liar!"

  "Yes it is!"

  "No it isn't!"

  "Yes it is!"

  etc.

Group 2:

  "Hi, we're SPF.  We're here to fix email."

  "But you're going to break stuff."

  "Well, yes, but email was broken before.  We're making it less broken."

  "Hmm.  OK, what's going to change?"

  "Well, there's the forwarding thing, and you have to do SMTP AUTH."

  "Damn.  Is there no other way?"

  "Not unless you want to keep getting spam."

  "All right, then.  I'll go bug my MTA vendor."

  "That's the spirit.  What do you have for sendmail?"

  "We're working on some patches.  Check back in a couple weeks."

-------
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
Wiki: 
http://spfwiki.infinitepenguins.net/pmwiki.php/SenderPermittedFrom/HomePage
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>