SPF record

[Matus UHLAR - fantomas]

On 04.11.08 07:51, Byung-Hee HWANG wrote:
> Yep, i agree with spam reduction. However, i was telling you the method
> has a risk. You guy need to consider again why the SPF [RFC4408]
> remained as Experimental RFC instead of Standards Track at IETF.

spam and backscatter elimination is the side-effect of SPF and DKIM.

> >> Recently i'm going with DKIM [RFC4871] as an alternative technique to
> >> reduce spam and phishing. DKIM is more reasonable, smooth, exact than
> > 
> > DKIM is a joke, is it yahoo or gmail or maybe both? use that, and look
> > at all the spam that comes from them.
> 
> Well, i believe that over the long term, DKIM is win. It means that
> peoples adopt reasonable things, at last ;;

SPF can be implementer on the pre-data phase, DKIM needs data to be
applied...

however this discussion is OT here I'd say
-- 
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar at fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Chernobyl was an Windows 95 beta test site.