Re: [Asrg] misconception in SPF

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Sat, 08 December 2012 02:06 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: asrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1435A21F8BE8 for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Dec 2012 18:06:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.24
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.24 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.659, BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J5UWx6iB-fho for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Dec 2012 18:06:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from leila.iecc.com (leila6.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:4c:6569:6c61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41FCF21F8BD5 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Fri, 7 Dec 2012 18:06:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 13278 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2012 02:06:19 -0000
Received: from leila.iecc.com (64.57.183.34) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 8 Dec 2012 02:06:19 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:vbr-info; s=50c2a09b.xn--hew.k1211; i=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=HoGIrGcy7MDiS11iG2GKrrlzrkQjH4F1fc9m9jPg3SY=; b=GKkAZmK7ILnAxYoKYy2aAGoP5/YzFRiVtsRNBdrNm1Baj6sKxwrZqfLMLSvbW1eC1NgqGJ8KNQlia7sAMqXxYupWc5J+Bf0Y1zVGELZhz3XTemfdayhtIWdD+zsJhY/fZSRWgDId+m3J8dwaEmXeLDWDgQa5JEElKT2r/Vxqy2E=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:vbr-info; s=50c2a09b.xn--hew.k1211; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=HoGIrGcy7MDiS11iG2GKrrlzrkQjH4F1fc9m9jPg3SY=; b=E4Ga6R5eerWPjVnQsNGatpmxF28jeoYyScXzHHkS3nEZ30Iz2mdrK3vLPUTbHjEz+/VASqFqp+m+hzWzcsvEz2wvSic+ovGreanpL0JCvsiSghM/kDF4axhutko21T10nSQP+bcuqSAyTv5SS1/9Sfp0Ns/w1MUPGRasbV4w42k=
VBR-Info: md=iecc.com; mc=all; mv=dwl.spamhaus.org
Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2012 02:05:57 -0000
Message-ID: <20121208020557.21177.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: asrg@irtf.org
In-Reply-To: <E1041B16-4AD9-4CE0-9383-C90A7023F41F@billmail.scconsult.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Asrg] misconception in SPF
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2012 02:06:21 -0000

>already publishing anti-functional MX records

I only publish a handful of anti-functional MX records, for a few
domains that get a buttload of spam due to having appeared in usenet
message IDs that were mis-scraped onto spam lists a long time ago.

I probably have two orders of magnitude more A records than MX records,
and I'm not inclined to add an MX . and SPF -all for all of them.