AT&T SMTP Admin contact?

Chris Owen owenc at
Thu Dec 3 00:53:26 CST 2009

On Dec 3, 2009, at 12:42 AM, John Levine wrote:

> I also agree that any domain with live users (as opposed to mail
> cannons sending ads or transaction confirmations) is likely to
> experience pain with -all from all the overenthusiastic little MTAs
> whose managers imagine that "stopping forgery" will lessen their spam
> load rather than losing mail from roaming users.

Again I guess I don't understand.   How are these MTA managers being "overenthusiastic"?

Publishing a SPF (with -all) is essentially me requesting that they reject any mail from my domain not coming from one of the approved hosts.   I'm the one making the decision to ask them to bounce such mail.   Seems to me they are only being responsible in actually enforcing a policy that I set for the domain.


Chris Owen         - Garden City (620) 275-1900 -  Lottery (noun):
President          - Wichita     (316) 858-3000 -    A stupidity tax
Hubris Communications Inc

More information about the NANOG mailing list