Michael Loftis wrote:
We've run into blocks on 465. Besides, we're not geared towards handling the (by my guess) 10-14 fold increase in mail volumes in order to handle all of the outbound mail too, atleast not right now. We could build out for that, but in a low margin business like web hosting, well, arguing to do that to support a flawed standard just seems not right.Well, if you're just doing web-hosting and not ISP stuff, then you're not the one who'd get put on the spam blacklists anyway.We'd rather have the ISPs responsible for their customer's SPAM, regardless of where the MAIL FROM envelope points to. :)
In your case, if your customers are using third-party outbound SMTPs, I don't see any reason why you can't list *those* SMTP servers in the SPF records. Provided that you customers consistently use the same SMTP servers every time (which is becoming more and more common), then everything should work the way its supposed to.
Call it "flawed" if you want, but it's looking like it's going to do a LOT more help than harm. The only non-flawed solution I have heard of is to have everyone (or every server) signing their outgoing mail with certificates. But hardly anybody is even talking about that. At least SPF has buy-in from AOL, Yahoo, Microsoft, and other big players and the spam blockers are starting to implement it... so it really looks like it's going to reach critical mass and become something everybody does.
- Joe
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature