Re: SPF deployment, was RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision ...
wayne <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.mxcomp |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
In <[email protected]> John Levine <[email protected]> writes: >>>The amount of mail going through SPF tests is still small, and only a few >>>aggressively wacky sites block mail that fails SPF. >> >>With the release of SA3.0, this is likely changing. > > Small amount of mail tested, or few wacky sites? Both, I suppose. You are the one that made the claim "The amount of mail going through SPF tests is still small, and only a few aggressively wacky sites block mail that fails SPF." Surely, you have data to back up your claim. I have some data that related to your claim, but first I want you to answer the following questions: How do you know that "the amount of mail going through SPF test is still small"? What do you define as "small"? How "small" is spf testing compared to other things, such as various DNSBL checks, or SpamAssassin usage, or whatever? -wayne