3 ms·
> But but again, this will _not_ solve SPAM as the parent implied. Nothing will, it's an unreasonable standard to set for a proposal intended to improve the si
by Avamander 4y ago
> But but again, this will _not_ solve SPAM as the parent implied.
Nothing will, it's an unreasonable standard to set for a proposal intended to improve the situation.
> it wouldn't _improve_ the ham/spam filtering ratio in my case.
But for many it would. Plus it would force legitimate e-mail senders to stay on-par with the spammers'.
- wakeupcall 4y agoIt's a very subjective view, but while I do absolutely recommend for every single system to have SPF at the very minimum, I didn't see any practical advantage for spam filtering for newer proposals such as DMARC/DKIM. Any spammer that has SPF enabled, will have the rest.