-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
False dichotomy Roger.
I have users that need to be able to access our network
from all over. With SMTP AUTH we all get along just fine
thankyouverymuch. This lets me use a fairly strict SPF
record without sacrificing service.
rogerk(_at_)queernet(_dot_)org wrote:
| Quoting John Keown <jdk(_at_)nni(_dot_)com>:
|
|
|>Too many people are looking at spf records from the administrator eyes and
|>not from the spammers eyes.
|
|
| Right. Because we don't think interfering with spammers is as high a
priority
| as serving our users and being sure they can send and receive all of the
| legitimate mail they need to. Because that, not being superspiffo
| spam-warriors, is our job.
|
|
|>Therefore the domain with excessive ip ranges in the spf records are just
|>asking to be used by the spammers.
|
|
| If my only two choices are "usable by my users, and therefore,
collaterally
| usable by spammers" and "not usable by my users, but safe from being
used by
| spammers," I'll opt for the first every time. The purpose of this whole
| discussion, and any technology, is to determine how you can do the
best job
| possible with no collateral damage.
|
- --
Daniel Taylor VP Operations Vocal Laboratories, Inc.
dtaylor(_at_)vocalabs(_dot_)com http://www.vocalabs.com/
(952)941-6580x203
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Debian - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFBB6708/QSptFdBtURAjykAJ4oUS5zqGZ2TvyEruXZqTynksq1uACcDqhZ
725+zmLhhPTq5T7QaNw+Iok=
=ur1+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----