[73921] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Spammers Skirt IP Authentication Attempts
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Jakma)
Wed Sep 8 09:26:40 2004
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 14:25:47 +0100 (IST)
From: Paul Jakma <paul@clubi.ie>
To: David Cantrell <david@cantrell.org.uk>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20040908125625.GG5486@bytemark.barnyard.co.uk>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004, David Cantrell wrote:
> Sure. But then, SPF is not meant to prevent all spam.
s/all//
> It would (if widely deployed) have a very wide effect on spam with
> forged senders though, and the consequent bounces to innocent third
> parties.
I agree bounce reduction would be a good thing. But, I'm sure I've
mentioned it already, *SRS achieves same thing* without breakage.
To put it as an analogy (seems the done thing), I can use a plank of
wood (SPF) to bang nails into a wall, but given the existence of
hammer (SRS), the plank doesnt cut it ;)
(and handing out planks so other people can make shelves isnt
interesting).
> The hype does not come from the people working on SPF, but from
> clueless hangers-on who apparently can't read.
Possible ;)
Anyway, enough. The topic is indeed OT, and i'm just a net.kook.
regards,
--
Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
Publishing a volume of verse is like dropping a rose petal down the
Grand Canyon and waiting for the echo.
