George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Nov 22, 2004, at 10:34 AM, Daniel Taylor wrote:
David Woodhouse wrote:
It's not about whether Joe has a way to send email through the company
servers. It's about whether Joe can send mail to people who forward
their mail. For Joe in sales to have his email rejected because his IS
department think the whole world has already implemented SRS, when in
fact that's not true, is not acceptable.
Anyone in an IS department publishing '-all' records for their company
should be fired for incompetence. Like I said, it's fine for toy domains
-- you have the right to break your own mail, and even to wear your
underpants on your head if you so desire. It's different in the real
world.
Without -all Joe in sales will have those same people dropping his mail
because of a softfail or neutral result without even the courtesy of
a bounce because they are too casual with their own business
communications.
Huh? Can you elaborate on the way in which SPF will cause these
softfail/neutral results to drop mail?
SPF wouldn't, but people's content-based spam filters are doing it all
the time. From the output of our Bayesian filter, SPF Neutral and
Softfail results have a high spam correlation.
We publish -all. I spend more time dealing with people losing mail
into spam filters than dealing with SPF rejects.
We get several messages per week from people who never saw
our confirmation e-mail and wonder why their panelist account
shows unconfirmed, we get no SPF DSN's from people using forwarding
addresses with SPF.
--
Daniel Taylor VP Operations Vocal Laboratories, Inc.
dtaylor(_at_)vocalabs(_dot_)com http://www.vocalabs.com/
(952)941-6580x203