From: "Commerco WebMaster" <Webmaster(_at_)Commerco(_dot_)Net>
I am wondering if there is a consideration or it makes sense to have a
"default MX" SPF lookup for the email domain?
Comments?
I'm not for this idea because I could see ways this might lead to
abuse or at least a lot of finger pointing. MX records define how to
send a message to a given domain, not necessarily where the domain
sends from (although I would not at all be surprised to learn that,
in a great deal of cases, it is the same SMTP server doing both jobs).
[You must be a unix person. :-) I see this in the discussions often in
various list probably because of little understanding of multi-threaded
processes or they are so use to see the separate processes in unix
environment. In the Windows, an SMTP server designed for high performance,
multi-threaded considerations, it is one process with three autonomous
threads (receiver, router, sender). It is functionally the same as three
separate processes in *nix world. So its not the same SMTP server doing
both jobs. It is one process, with two or more separate agents (threads)
working autonomously to provide the MDA, MTA, MSA integrated personality.]
Anyway, you are right, but I was thinking more about the responsible network
that hosted the MX record for the email domain. If the responsible network
was using SPF for its own protection, then I was thinking that might be some
correlation with any hosted domain. See my other messages to william and
stuat. Note, I am fully aware that I might be going no where with this :-)
Just thinking to see if there is justification to lump a hosted domain with
the responsible ISP who does have an SPF record but does not reflect the
host domain in the policy.
FWIW, Commerco also publishes MX records, but often publishes as
"v=spf1 -all" for many domains because they just don't send outbound
mail.
Ahh, I see. So basically if the responsible ISP got reports that one of his
hosted domains is spamming with this hosted domain, he could do this
v=spf1 -all for that domian?
By having the MX, we can avoid certain other problems (e.g.,
postmaster and abuse for a given domain are not available without an
MX record) and rapidly identify when name abuse is taking place.
By having the MX where? Do you have an example so I can
better understand this?
Thanks for your input.
--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com