I think that this sort of discussion is an example of the types of things
one can do when checking SPF in the MTA that are rather more difficult to
do in a post-SMTP processor like SpamAssassin.
SA doesn't have to be a post-SMTP processor, you can also run SA at SMTP
time and reject messages if you like.
I think that the SA approach is good when you have no other options, but
that one ought to check SPF before SA when one can.
Why not do both? Other than rejecting on SPF fail, at this moment there is
fairly little one can do with an SPF result code at SMTP time.
If a sending system is already scoring enough points to be in the danger
zone for SA, the additional score on an SPF_NEUTRAL score might be just
enough to tip the scale. In itself, any of the default SA SPF scores
(slightly more than 1) will not nearly be enough to classify a message as
spam.
Regards, Arjen
-------
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