On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 08:10:41PM +0000, Julian Mehnle wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Robert Millan wrote:
Any comments/suggestions/etc ? Do you think it's a good idea ? Is
there anything that could be changed in this message to make it impact
more positively in the image of SPF?
In theory it sounds like a good idea. Whether it's a good idea in
practice, too, depends on the actual false rejection rate. If you try it,
please report your results!
Ok. I just decided to turn the warning into a reject. These are the results
at the time I did the change:
=== Ham ===
pass:
129
neutral:
4
Ham pass: .969
=== Spam ===
pass:
13
softfail:
4
neutral:
24
Spam pass: .317
HTH.
--
Robert Millan
My spam trap is honeypot(_at_)aybabtu(_dot_)com(_dot_) Note: this address is
only intended for
spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list.
-------
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