Hacker News Reader

Comment by sylware | Hacker News Reader

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

Not if you want to deliver e-mail to Google, they recently added this as a requirement.

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.

Still working fine here. And about to switch to no-DNS emails (alice@[x.x.x.x] and bob@[IPv6:...] in the SMTP specs)

Highly unlikely you'd be able to deliver any mail to any significant operator after that switch.

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.

> 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.

> It's really not a racket and it's really not critical.

This means, we cannot agree.

It’s not, SPF won’t survive a forwarded email. Make sure to use DKIM and DMARC policy to properly mitigate any authenticity issues.

SPF is so obsolete that DMARC is going to get an option to disable evaluating it altogether.

Why do you say SPF is obsolete? What has replaced it?

DKIM is in all aspects better.

Works great with email address forwarding.

Certainly not.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com