----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin G. Diehl" <mdiehl(_at_)nac(_dot_)net>
To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 11:52 PM
Subject: [spf-discuss] Could SPF prevent delivery of Non-SPAM eMail?
Greetings,
I know and agree that the entire point of the SPF initiative
is to eradicate SPAM. It will probably also make it very
difficult to introduce new eMail viruses, Trojans, Mail Bombs
... it might even get rid of Usenet Trolls.
What? No! It's to block forged email. This is useful for reducing spam and
keeping the headers interpretable so that the responsible sender or ISP can
be contacted. But please don't staple things on it that it doesn't do.
It is not something that I or anyone would want to oppose.
However, I do have an important question ...
Can SPF disrupt the delivery of valid eMail?
Of course it can. *ANY* filter approach can accidentally block valid email.
And no one in the world capitalizes the M in email, but if you want to have
fun with it.
Have we considered how SPF might disrupt the delivery of
eMail that is not SPAM?
Yes, we've thought long and hard about it and discussed it thoroughly.
Have we considered eMail configurations that would lead to
such a 'false positive' detection?
Yes. It's called email forwarding, and careless use of clients outside the
permitted sending configurations of the domain owners.
Have we considered how to allow some kind of 'safety net' ...
authentication, whitelist, ... ?
Why yes. There's SMTPAUTH for field use by remote clients, webmail if
they're blocked by their remote firewalls, and SRS or SES for email
forwarding to re-condition the "MAIL FROM" line into something valid for
mail from that forwarding host.
I've just joined the discussion, if the archives for this
forum already have the answers to my questions, just give
me the URL(s).
They're over at http://spf.pobox.com/.
... and I'll sit quietly over there in the dark, out of the
way while I chew on that history for a while. <g>
It's cool.