Re: @debian.org mail
Le 03/06/2019 à 17:21, Sam Hartman a écrit :
>>>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Lange <DLange@debian.org> writes:
>
> Daniel> Hence I'd like us to offer email services to project members. That's
> Daniel> an offer. Not a requirement. If DDs use the Debian infra or continue
> Daniel> using their current setup, all fine for me.
>
> We're agreed so far.
>
> Daniel> Yes, a proper SPF record may make things more difficult for people
> Daniel> that run their own. But I - for example - run my own and route via
> Daniel> Debian MX (just the Debian mail of course). So it can be
> Daniel> done.
>
> I explained why I find routing the mail problematic.
> But more than that, you don't need the SPF record.
> Debian could pay to get on one of the white lists, we could use some services
> like Amazon SES, we could possibly get a good enough dkim reputation
> that we don't need to do any of the above.
>
> My point is that from experience, the SPF record will totally cripple
> people wanting to use their own infrastructure even worse than we see
> today.
We can use "~all" or "?all" in SPF record, so it would increase Debian's
email reputation when using Debian SMTP services but would authorize to
use some other service. I remember that there is something like that in
DKIM.
> I absolutely agree with the idea of improving Debian's email reputation.
+1
Reply to: