On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 08:51:07PM +0200, David Saez wrote:
[> Jim Punster wrote, and david, yet again, snipped the attributions:]
> > I would be signing on for an
> > unknown amount of maintenance. eeek!
> well, it's your job, you are suposed to be paid for doing it and you are
> suposed to do your best to protect your users (just in the case it really
> take you some considerably amount of time, but that's not the case)
This is a totally ridiculous statement. I don't run mail for any sort of
job. I get paid by 2 people to do it, and I don't get paid enough by them
to stop their spam. In my day job, I'm a programmer, not a mailadmin. SPF
hasn't addressed null-senders, and doesn't address forwarding (both of
which I use heavily. It is therefore, currently, a deficient solution. It
is also an I-D, and I-Ds should not be implemented on a wide scale before
they hit the standards track, and start actually being published.
(actually, is it even that far, or was it just on their webpage, looking
like an I-D?)
MBM
--
Matthew Byng-Maddick <mbm@???> http://colondot.net/
