spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [spf-discuss] Bounce-Spam and SPF-Ignorant ISPs - it is time to retaliate?

2006-02-06 14:30:16
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
Since MFROM signing effectively alleviates the bounce spam problem, I
suppose it is not critical enough to warrant dictating receiver policy
in the RFC. Sure is annoying, though.

The main reason why the SPF spec does not recommend that bounces should 
never, never, ever(!) be sent due to a failed SPF check is that it should 
be obvious to everyone who has understood the point of SPF.  If SPF says 
"this envelope sender is forged", then it simply makes no sense to send a 
bounce message to the forged address, period.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFD5799wL7PKlBZWjsRAvToAJ9QoC7kiT5oJB1grUnBFMaF+spkFQCfT6PH
IVvW2yf5Izr78xmggL1SLfk=
=MmxN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
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