Re: SPF was Re: never use sorbs
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 23:07:42 -0600, Michael Loftis
<mloftis@modwest.com> wrote:
>That's just it, if you're forwarding for a customer, then you'd be
>forwarding the envelope right now with a MAIL FROM of say @stev.org, so if
>you were mailing one of our customers, and they asked us to forward mail to
>a server who implemented SPF, and you had an SPF record, *YOU* would have
>to figure out an publish *OUR* MXers.
To overcome that, any mail server operator who does any forwarding is
expected to implement SRS. And that's the catch; SRS is a mess people
don't want to deal with.
The result is, many join the crowd and publish an SPF record, but
don't actually use SPF for anything. If that trend continues, SPF is
as good as dead.
I asked fastmail.fm whether I could forward to them in the traditional
(non-SRS) way, and they said go ahead, they don't use SPF for blocking
mail.
For anyone wanting to receive traditional forwarding, SPF is poison.
Reply to: