Membership disabled due to bounces

Richard Loken rlloken at
Thu Nov 24 22:52:33 CST 2016

On Thu, 24 Nov 2016, Graham Toal wrote:

> Not so.  By doing nothing (ie NOT creating an SPF record for the sending
> domain) you pretty much guarantee a lack of problems. (At least, these
> specific problems).  It's the smart aleck admins who do create SPF records
> etc who cause the problems, in conjunction with recipients that think these
> records are worth paying attention to.  The irony is that SPF was invented
> by the advertising industry to ensure that their so called 'legitimate'
> bulk mail gets through; it does very little to stop actual spam and it
> completely messes up mailing lists and people who use traditional SMTP mail
> while travelling.  Sorry, I shouldn't start on SPF, it just drives me
> crazy.  If you are a DNS admin, *please* don't fall for the SPF bullshit.
> (For some reason Microsoft are totally enamored of it and twist their
> clients' arms to enable it :-/ )

You are preaching to the choir.  Some of the first implementers of SPFs
were outfits that the rest of us would call spammers.  As for Micro$oft,
my employer trashed our Zimbra and PMDF servers and sent us over to
Office365 so now I spend my time babysitting Exchange in the cloud,
writing PowerShell scripts, and waiting a Micro$oft minute for things
to happen that used to be immediate.

And you are right, Micro$ofts loves SPFs but they do nothing at all to
expedite our mail through their servers.

And in honour of Micro$oft, SPFs, and my 21st century managers, I am
retiring in 29 days.

   Richard Loken VE6BSV, Systems Programmer - VMS   : "...underneath those
   Athabasca University				   : tuques we wear, our
   Athabasca, Alberta Canada			   : heads are naked!"
   ** rlloken at **                         :    - Arthur Black

More information about the cctalk mailing list