Re: SPF+SRS vs. BATV

David Woodhouse wrote:

> Given your frustration, do you mind if I ask you _why_ you want SPF to
> become a standard? I came to the list about 18 months ago intending to
> implement and advocate this shiny new thing, but soon changed my mind
> when I saw how broken it was... so what made you choose SPF instead of
> the myriad of alternatives?
>
>  
1) It is open source
2) It has many major players such as AOL onboard
3) To me, it appears to be the 'root' for most of the other systems
4) The plans for SPF appear to be 'a pathway' on which we have taken 
only the first step.
The basic email system was created at a time when there was more of a 
'trust' among users of the internet, and those users were more net 
savvy. Today, anybody that knows how to press the 'On' button on a 
computer can be on a broadband system.
Perhaps we have reached a major junction where those original practices 
should be considered 'broken' instead of SPF being broken. The truely 
broken part of email has nothing to do with the email system itselt, but 
the abuse of email by spammers and in particular end users on 
compromised computers. Large ISPs have been responsible for a lot of 
this, as they have not monitored their users, allowing these compromised 
computers on broadband to continue spamming for varying times. I can 
understand their issue with shutting down these ab'users', as those 
people generally have little knowledge about computing, or they wouldn't 
have the virus to start with, but if cut off, would just jump over to 
'otherLargeISP' and be back at it again.
Even after saying all of that.... the 'real' breakage in email is 'spam 
filtering'. Asking computers to be as smart as humans in sorting email 
is simply not reasonable. Now, let's not go off arguing about that, but 
for JoeAverageUser and JoeAverageSysAdmin, spam filtering has caused me 
more issues with the failure of good email delivery than any other 
reason (in fact, I just got another email from a user having a 
'blocking' problem, which in this case is out of my control as they use 
postini on the way in). To me, Spam has broken email and 'sure' methods 
need to be put into place to reduce spam or to 'clearly' identify where 
spam is originating, so that 'reliable' blocking can be done.
Unreliable 'stop-gaps' are found all over the internet, I want a 
reliable system, even if we have to re-invent (purge) some of the old 
acceptable methods of transfer. The time, disk space, bandwidth and 
processing power used up by spam, to me, far offsets some of the 
work-a-rounds we may need to ultimately put into place. First we built 
houses, then we put up doors to keep bad things out, then we put locks 
on the doors to keep worse things out, then we installed burgler alarms 
to keep even worse things out...... Email is finally needing a door on 
the opening. SPF opens the latch.
John Hinton