implementing SPF, which milter?

Arthur Sherman arturs at
Fri Mar 2 10:00:04 CET 2007

a ISP SMTP could be whitelisted.
Also, your travelling customers could use Webmail, thus eliminating the need
to involve third party mail server at all.
i feel guys that this "either 100% or 0%" approach is doubtful.
it is just another filter.
i use it mostly so that well-configured mailers (hopefuly, mine is among
these :) with SPF checks enabled would drop SPAM impersonating my clients
If that mailer didn't check it out and let SPAM in - his bad! my good...


Arthur Sherman




From: mailscanner-bounces at
[mailto:mailscanner-bounces at] On Behalf Of Michael
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 3:19 AM
To: MailScanner discussion
Subject: Re: implementing SPF, which milter?

On 02 Mar 2007, at 5:46 AM, James Fagan wrote:

On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, Chris Yuzik wrote:

I understand that I need a milter to implement SPF (we use



have any recommendations?


I use spamilter

I used this for a while. The reason I stopped using this milter is that
SO many systems have invalid spf records and some other weird shared IP
That made it more trouble than it was worth and this was nearly
impossible to explain to our customers. Yes, there is a whitelist you
can impliment, but I don't want to have to add <N> domains a day to this

I love the idea of spf, but I don't think there are enough correctly
configured domains to warrant its use. I would continue to let
spamassassin catch them for you. Of cource your experience may be
different then mine.

I had to disable SPF for one of our customers as they had users travelling
in europe and middle east and were forced to use the ISP's SMTP server.
Anyone in Europe can verify or explain?

Michael Choo
ACTC, APP 2006

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the MailScanner mailing list