Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
It really is spamming me.
Maybe report the UBE as spam, especially if it
violates RFC 3834.
One area, that I think SPF missed was CNAME.
Why do you think that ? AFAIK SPF doesn't say
"don't follow CNAME", that is a rule in 2821bis
about MX.
| On the 1st of January 2009, our mail server
| will be rejecting any mail from domains that
| do not have a SPF record.
IMO they'd better publish their future receiver
policy on a web page, and use its URL in their
future 5xx reject status codes.
Just "having" an SPF record could be a useless
"v=spf1 ?all" always NEUTRAL policy, this is by
definition the same as NONE (no policy).
| Until your SPF record are updated, you will
| be receiving this message each day, until
| the 1st of January 2009, for each daily
| message you send to our clients.
Sigh, the one thing that is always worse than
spam are wannabe-anti-spammers. You say you
have a policy, so is that s/wannabe/clueless/ ?
Frank
-------------------------------------------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org
Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com