Re: Re: SRS for postfix ?

Hello,


>> I think the authors/promoters of SPF/SRS should engage directly in  
>> this
>> issue and provide the community with good and simple  
>> implementations of
>> SPF/SRS for each every major version of populars MTAs.
>>
>> If this was done it would sooner prove or disprove any doubts  
>> about the
>> usefulness and viability of widespread SPF/SRS usage.
>
> It is not at all necessary to use SRS with SPF.  SRS is a  
> workaround for
> forwarders whose customers are unwilling or unable (their mail  
> provider
> doesn't let them) to properly configure their SPF checker.  A much  
> less
> intrusive way to handle receiver initiated forwarding is a trusted- 
> forwarder
> list - either public or private.  Of course, a forwarder that  
> doesn't check
> SPF just becomes a spam conduit.  But this happens with or without  
> SRS.

I don't use it yet, but there is more and more people that have -all  
in their
SPF headers....

Problem is customers (that, as usual, don't understand how a smtp/spf/ 
etc... works
and want their bloody mail what ever it is without getting spam and  
loosing any mail)...

> I do not SRS for forwarding.  I use it for MFROM signing to reject  
> forged
> DSNs from MTAs that do not check SPF.
>
> I repeat - SRS is *not* needed for an effective SPF implementation.
>
> SRS for forwarding is only needed by forwarders with clueless/ 
> powerless
> clients.

I see :)

/Xavier