Meng Weng Wong wrote:
On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 08:14:37AM -0500, Daniel Taylor wrote:
| We are having _really_ good results with SPFv1 so far.
| 2 months ago our e-mail was nearly unusable for the spam.
|
| Fully 1/2 of our inbound e-mail has been SPF rejectable for the
| past few days, with no detectable false positives (most of it I would
| have manually filtered by subject or To:). Of the rest, about
| 10% have had SPF pass records, which are allowing me to be stricter
| with my spam filtering.
Could you share with us any detailed stats? A breakdown of what rules
exactly caused rejects would be really helpful. Specifically the HELO
stuff as others have suggested, etc.
Here is a recent day's results (yeah, we are a pretty small site):
21 Received-SPF: neutral
555 Received-SPF: none
860 Received-SPF: pass
4 Received-SPF: softfail
2 Received-SPF: unknown
With 616 rejected for SPF fail results. Most of the SPF fails were
on MAIL FROM, the HELO's were literally all over the map.
Only 100 of the pass results were inbound, the rest were outbound.
--
Daniel Taylor VP Operations Vocal Laboratories, Inc.
dtaylor(_at_)vocalabs(_dot_)com http://www.vocalabs.com/
(952)941-6580x203