OT: SPF Anyone?

[David Höhn]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

David Lee wrote:

| On Mon, 8 Mar 2004, Rose, Bobby wrote:
|
|
|>Same here/  I updated DNS I January but I'll proably use SpamAssassin
|>support for it instead.  You know there are going to be a lot of domains
|>out there that won't have SPF records so it makes sense to use a scoring
|>method first.   The score and MailScanner's high spam action should be
|>enough to implement an SPF solution.  Granted MailScanner will need to
|>be updated for SA 3.0 to work, but it's only the SA.pm that'll need
|>updated to use different calls.  But that all is still a ways off.
|
|
| According to the SPF website http://www.pobox.com/ intro page at
| http://www.pobox.com/intro.html:
|   "SPF expects to see support in SpamAssassin 2.70"
| (rather than the 3.0 stated above).
|
| Next question (veering off-topic perhaps): does anyone know approximately
| when SA2.70 is due?  (And whether SPF's statement about SA2.70 is correct?
| And what the SA/SPF rules and initial scores might look like?)

And how I disable them as fast s I can :)

- --
nee anata wo mitsukete soshite nidoto wasurezu
~      donna ni munega itakutemo soba ni iru no
~                         zutto...zutto...zutto
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFAUJLOPMoaMn4kKR4RA9WLAKCh3WNykTga04V2t7+LAohqnVkqzwCfco3R
CKSKpoZGkt8Rm0J8jcqa86s=
=4A9V
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----