-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
WebMaster(_at_)commerco(_dot_)net wrote:
Getting back to the original point of the thread, why Google
apparently wants folks to specify "~all" rather than "-all", perhaps
in their case (because they offer a huge email service), they don't
wish to reveal all the possible outgoing SMTP servers to avoid some
type of attack on GMail. Personally, I think there are better ways
of handling such things even in huge scale email service environments.
An interesting theory of yours, but I think if that was their motivation,
they would have been bright enough to use an "exists:" mechanism to hide
their infrastructure. :-)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFHbGKrwL7PKlBZWjsRAjLvAJ9JeTqhjgiVEhwrN9rtIvDS0QDefgCfQgmP
QQdgdpJgUFX6SfKg9XbauUs=
=ty87
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------------------------------------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=2183229&id_secret=78733173-40d22d
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com