Hi !!
You are right, i desagrre. [...]
One of the problems with SES is key distribution, and that is an
ongoing cost.
you could use ses to sign the mailfrom without any need to
distribute keys, in fact, i cannot see anywhere on ses specs that
keys have to be available to others than the one who has signed
the mailfrom.
Similarly, if exmaple.com allows certain people to work from home,
those people either are forced to go through example.com's MTAs, or
somehow there needs to be a key (and SES software) given to the
employee. With SPF+SRS, they can simply list that home user in their
record.
this is also possible with ses, there are no keys and policy is
published at spf records or inside the ses signature, so you have
the same flexibility.
So, I happen to agree with Meng. I think the total work needed to do
SPF+SRS is less than SPF+SES.
that's mainly because you don't really know how ses works. I really
see a big difference about the work need between both systems.
I think both SRS and SES have their places and that they both have
certain problems. But then, if there was an easy and clean solution
to the spam problem, it would have been done many years ago.
well, many many years ago the spam problem was not as big as today
and almost nobody tried to find a solution to it.
--
Best regards ...
It's a fine line between fishing & standing still
----------------------------------------------------------------
David Saez Padros http://www.ols.es
On-Line Services 2000 S.L. e-mail david(_at_)ols(_dot_)es
Pintor Vayreda 1 telf +34 902 50 29 75
08184 Palau-Solita i Plegamans movil +34 670 35 27 53
----------------------------------------------------------------