-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Part of what we are trying to do with SPF (some of us anyway) is
to push more of the costs of spamming back onto the spammers.
This is why SMTP-time rejects and strict records are important.
Every unwanted message that is rejected before DATA is that much
less bandwidth consumed. Every message that is rejected at SMTP time
is that much less storage used. This doesn't "win the war" all at once,
but it gives mail administrators a stronger position to work from.
On the other side, those zombie armies the spammers maintain aren't
free. A fair amount of effort needs to go into tracking and maintaining
their networks, and every strict SPF rule, and every site that rejects
on FAIL reduce the value of those networks by some amount.
Frankly, I think that widespread strict SPF could put a dent not just in
spam, but in the virus problem as well, by taking some of the economic
incentive out of it.
Of course, I have been accused of being overly optimistic in the past ;)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCig/k8/QSptFdBtURAgarAJ9adWeyLYOJ0t0TjE6Kiw9idAu7EwCeNy+U
0DeDwylXyculqBMfzYFsdSs=
=KY3B
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----