----- Original Message -----
From: "Gaven Henderson" <Gaven(_at_)GavDogg(_dot_)net>
Note: Please don't assume that I dislike SPF in any way. I think that, a
few problems aside, this is a great solution. I would like to see it
become
more effective, that's all.
You could always use a strong hard pass/fail policy for your system.
The problem of a remote policy being relaxed is basically that it turned it
into a overhead, simply because more has to be done by your receiver system.
We do a CBV, others do a similar Callback Reporting concept to validate or
confirm the non-exclusive (relaxed) sender. Some other system couple it
with a Spam Scorer.
NEUTRAL RESULT + REAL SPAM = SPAM
The problem is that:
PASS + REAL SPAM is still SPAM
At this point, SPF is just one part of the solution at this point.
--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com