spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Fwd: Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http: //www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"]

2005-05-27 04:56:39
On Thu, 26 May 2005, johnp wrote:

SPF is not and never will be an anti-spam protocol, and must never be
promoted as such.

Duh.  Only FUD from its enemies says otherwise.

spf.pobox.com is the worst possible vehicle for promoting spf.

Agreed.

The council needs to take spf.pobox,com down - better it was a dead link
than to be putting forward such views, and using spf so badly itself.

Hadn't thought of that.  However, I would be much happier with
a new site that I could link to.  Then I could start publically
disparaging pobox.com as an SPF traitor.

Meantime we must promote SPF as a means of confirming MAILFROM against
the spf record.. More will come in time, but we have wasted sooooo much
time already that I have given up until the council clarifies this.

Yes, I get rather tired of the endless stream of newbies who bought
the FUD that SPF is anti-spam.  But really, SPF has never claimed
to be anything but anti-forgery for MAILFROM (and HELO).

Personally, I think 95% of the discuss list is irrelevant to what Wayne
is trying to do - document an existing usage.  It is useful in the
context of spf3 but that is some way off.

True.

-- 
              Stuart D. Gathman <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
    Business Management Systems Inc.  Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flamis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>