spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Is SPF all that useful?

2004-07-23 17:16:39


-----Original Message-----
From: Koen Martens [mailto:spf(_at_)metro(_dot_)cx]
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 5:03 PM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] Is SPF all that useful?


I run spf with a secondary mx and have no problem with it. How? The
secondary does spf checks as well as all other checks my 
primary does, and 
the primary trusts everything it receives from the secondary. Now the
only problem I see with this is that someone could be able to 
spoof the
ip of my secondary, but that's a risk i'm willing to take.


I see.  So, whatever other sort of filters I am running on my primary MTA
have to be enabled on my secondary MTA.  Thus, any spam marking, stripping,
discarded, etc. that occurs on my primary has to be duplicated on any
secondary MTA I have.  In my case, that would require additional hardware,
not to mention time configuring and testing the software config.

Then, the question becomes benefit vs. cost on running a secondary or
tertiary mail server.  

Alright, I see that this particular issue can be resolved with the
appropriate configuration.


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