3 ms·

SPF is enough (and it is built-in with plain no-DNS SMTP servers).

• pawal 3y ago
  Not if you want to deliver e-mail to Google, they recently added this as a requirement.
  • sirius87 3y ago
    Yep. I have a catch-all email address for a domain that forwards all mail to Gmail and that stopped working somewhere in the Jul-Aug timeframe. Had to set up DomainKeys to fix the issue.
  • sylware 3y ago
    Still working fine here. And about to switch to no-DNS emails (alice@[x.x.x.x] and bob@[IPv6:...] in the SMTP specs)
    • Avamander 3y ago
      Highly unlikely you'd be able to deliver any mail to any significant operator after that switch.
      • sylware 3y ago
        I did run a few months in no-DNS email mode without issues, but was 2-3 years ago. I know regulation and lawyers may be needed if significant conflicts happen with unreasonable system administrators. It is critically important to keep the emails flowing independently from the DNS mafia/racket, like the web, but I guess we all very know that here on HN.
        • Avamander 3y ago
          > It is critically important to keep the emails flowing independently from the DNS mafia/racket It's really not a racket and it's really not critical.
          • sylware 3y ago
            > It's really not a racket and it's really not critical. This means, we cannot agree.
• tmpX7dMeXU 3y ago
  Certainly not.
• 0x073 3y ago
  Works great with email address forwarding.
• Avamander 3y ago
  SPF is so obsolete that DMARC is going to get an option to disable evaluating it altogether.
  • alt227 3y ago
    Why do you say SPF is obsolete? What has replaced it?
    • Avamander 3y ago
      DKIM is in all aspects better.
• tamimio 3y ago
  It’s not, SPF won’t survive a forwarded email. Make sure to use DKIM and DMARC policy to properly mitigate any authenticity issues.