Postfix.org SPF
in [Postfix]
|
From: Scott Kitterman on 4 Jul 2010 23:09 On Sunday, July 04, 2010 10:51:32 pm JunkYardMail1(a)verizon.net wrote: > Yahoo has ulterior motives? They wish to push their domain keys. > > Others probably likewise have ulterior motives. > > Do you also oppose SPF, and if so what is your motives? > Please stop. This is offtopic for this list and not helpful in any case. Some people like and use SPF and some people don't. Rejecting or discarding mail due simply to a lack of and SPF record is idiotic and domain owners are completely free to publish a record or not. Consult Google if you want to know my views on SPF (they aren't hard to find). If you want to discuss SPF, there is an spf-discuss mailing list where such discussions are on topic (see http://www.openspf.org/Forums for details). Scott K
From: JunkYardMail1 on 5 Jul 2010 00:08 US financial services industry group endorses SPF, so most banks, credit unions, brokerages, etc. publish an SPF record. MAAWG: "At the very least, senders should incorporate SPF records for their mailing domains". Austrailan DoD Recommends SPF Google.com, GoogleMail.com, Gmail.com, Comcast.net, Verizon.net, Frontier.net, Charter.com, Microsoft.com, Hotmail.com, Live.com, AOL.com All publish SPF records as well. It is simply becoming unnecessary to accept email from domains which do not publish an SPF record to let receiving domains know the systems that are authorized to transfer email for them. And doing so cuts into spam significantly. -------------------------------------------------- From: <JunkYardMail1(a)Verizon.net> Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 7:51 PM To: <postfix-users(a)postfix.org> Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF > Yahoo has ulterior motives? They wish to push their domain keys. > > Others probably likewise have ulterior motives. > > Do you also oppose SPF, and if so what is your motives? > > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "mouss" <mouss(a)ml.netoyen.net> > Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 7:29 PM > To: <postfix-users(a)postfix.org> > Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF > >> JunkYardMail1(a)Verizon.net a �crit : >>> Some do not accept email from domains whose owner does not publish the >>> servers they authorize to transfer mail for their domain. >>> >> >> Then it's their problem. Please don't revive the old spf thread. spf has >> fans and opponents. >> >> $ host -t txt yahoo.com >> yahoo.com has no TXT record >> $ host -t txt mail.com >> mail.com has no TXT record >> $ host -t txt outblaze.com >> outblaze.com has no TXT record >> ... >> (same with "spf" instead of "txt"). >> >> >>> -------------------------------------------------- >>> From: "Sahil Tandon" <sahil(a)FreeBSD.org> >>> Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 11:53 AM >>> To: <postfix-users(a)postfix.org> >>> Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF >>> >>>> On Sat, 2010-07-03 at 11:45:39 -0700, JunkYardMail1(a)Verizon.net wrote: >>>> >>>>> How about publishing an SPF record for postfix.org. >>>> >>>> Why? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Sahil Tandon <sahil(a)FreeBSD.org> >>> >>
From: Sahil Tandon on 5 Jul 2010 00:12 On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 21:08:58 -0700, JunkYardMail1(a)Verizon.net wrote: [blah blah blah] > It is simply becoming unnecessary to accept email from domains which > do not publish an SPF record to let receiving domains know the systems > that are authorized to transfer email for them. And doing so cuts > into spam significantly. Please stop. This is not the appropriate forum for SPF evangelism. Do you have a Postfix question? If not, please DO NOT reply to this email or continue this thread. This is a technical mailing list ABOUT POSTFIX. Thank you. -- Sahil Tandon <sahil(a)FreeBSD.org>
From: JunkYardMail1 on 5 Jul 2010 00:27 My original post was regarding postfix. But you and others who seemed more interested in taking it off topic to squelch the request for postfix.org to publish an SPF record. I oblige the challenge and then you all start complain about thread being off topic. Well it wouldn't be off topic if you all wouldn't have taken it off topic. So now, how about it. How about an SPF record for the postfix.org domain, from which posting to this mail list come. Anyone opposed to the postfix.org domain publishing an SPF record? -------------------------------------------------- From: "Sahil Tandon" <sahil(a)FreeBSD.org> Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 9:12 PM To: <postfix-users(a)postfix.org> Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF > On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 21:08:58 -0700, JunkYardMail1(a)Verizon.net wrote: > > [blah blah blah] > >> It is simply becoming unnecessary to accept email from domains which >> do not publish an SPF record to let receiving domains know the systems >> that are authorized to transfer email for them. And doing so cuts >> into spam significantly. > > Please stop. This is not the appropriate forum for SPF evangelism. Do > you have a Postfix question? If not, please DO NOT reply to this email > or continue this thread. This is a technical mailing list ABOUT > POSTFIX. Thank you. > > -- > Sahil Tandon <sahil(a)FreeBSD.org>
From: John Levine on 5 Jul 2010 00:48 >Anyone opposed to the postfix.org domain publishing an SPF record? Yes. Now, can you go away, please? R's, John, MAAWG senior technical advisor, among other things
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 Prev: Connection Refused on Port 25 Next: Postfix 2.7 for RHEL 5? |