[Mimedefang] Deadline for SPF records

[Brenden Conte]

On Tue, 2004-08-10 at 13:55, Daniel Taylor wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
<snip>
> Say your potential client sends the same e-mail from the same location
> and your spam filter sidelines it because it triggered a couple minor
> SA rules and was from a blackholed IP range.
> 
> Now your potential client thinks the mail went through, you know nothing
> about it, and the business opportunity may well pass permanently because
> the potential client thinks you just aren't interested in the business.
> They are almost definitely offended by the non-response.
> 
> Which scenario works better for you?
> 
> - --
> Daniel Taylor          VP Operations            Vocal Laboratories, Inc.
> dtaylor at vocalabs.com   http://www.vocalabs.com/        (952)941-6580x203
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Debian - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iD8DBQFBGQwl8/QSptFdBtURAifNAJ4pcMpfqvm/7W8QC8Kd0aeQkezxcQCfVej0
> 6/vne8j6V6GsqleCcnW0unc=
> =PgoW
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
> MIMEDefang mailing list
> MIMEDefang at lists.roaringpenguin.com
> http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang

This assumes that:
a) The user in question knows about and understand SPF, and why it
didn't work and
b) knows and understands email, and that the bounce they just received
was not because our mail servers were broken or we run a shoddy service.
c) noone checks their spam traps.

If neither A or B are true, then you risk a lost potential client.
(This, of course, assumes you are not dealing with 100% technically savy
client base)
If C is true, thats more of a responsibility issue.

-- 
Brenden Conte
System Programmer, C&CT
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
(518)276-2540