In
<5(_dot_)2(_dot_)1(_dot_)1(_dot_)0(_dot_)20050629173613(_dot_)0350d308(_at_)pop(_dot_)mail(_dot_)yahoo(_dot_)com>
David MacQuigg <dmquigg-lists(_at_)yahoo(_dot_)com> writes:
it seems like getting rid of fake bounces is only getting rid
of a minor annoyance. They can be rejected by other means
just as well.
I didn't mean to start a whole new tangent here, and I'm sorry if I
underestimated the importance of eliminating backscatter in the
benefits of SPF.
I think that there is quite a range of opinions in the SPF community
about how important the problem of backscatter is in relation to SPF.
I think that if backscatter was really a super critical thing to most
people, the ABBS system would have taken off. (ABBS was later
re-invented as SES, and then again as BATV.)
Besides reducing bounces, SPF also lets domain owners assert some
control over the use of their domain name (similar to "no trespassing"
or "no shoplifting" signs), and it also enables domain-based
reputation systems.
Spamassassin has long had rules to detect "forged email" from major
ISPs and those rules have been very useful. SA isn't the only
anti-spam system to use such rules. SPF basically automates and
generalizes this test, allow domain owners to say which are clearly
good sources, which are clearly a bad sources, and which sources they
can't tell you about.
-wayne