[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [spf-discuss] SPF -all domain survey

2007-12-10 15:41:15
On Monday 10 December 2007 15:40, Stephan Seitz wrote:
Scott Kitterman schrieb:
On Monday 10 December 2007 03:59, Stephan Seitz wrote:
Hi Greg,

we're setting up -all records by default (changed on request) for all
of our hosting clients.

Do you discuss this with your clients?

Hi Scott,

most of our clients are not really involved in technical issues. Generally,
they just want to know "it works".
If we show up the pros and cons of spf records, the question is never which
particular setting to use, it's more like a "we'll use your smarthosts and
you're taking care that our blackberry devices continue to work"

How do you know you have a complete list of mail servers from which your
clients send mail?

as said, we're providing smarthosts for our clients. Their in no way
forced to use them, we just try to give a good service for fair money.
The spf record is set after such decisions are made.

How does using your service mean that they use no others?

Additionally, i must say that SPF causes minimal amount of tickets,
compared to e.g. how to setup a new IMAP account ;)
Sometimes, even positive responses arrive, stating that "THE MAILER-DAEMON"
is writing much lesser.

Yes.  The problem is we usually get them here after someone gets a 
bounce/rejection message with a link to the SPF Why page:


When providers publish SPF record on behalf of their clients without finding 
out how they send mail, it puts the support burden on us.  This is, in my 
experience, by far the number one cause of people submitting support tickets 
to openspf.org about rejected mail.  Often it's their first contact with SPF 
and it's not a happy one.

If you actually know they only use your service, that's great, but please make 
sure you know it and aren't just assuming it.

Scott K

Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/
Modify Your Subscription: 
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com