I understand that, but it still doesn't address the include:xxx condition I outlined above. If we use an application service provider that sends email on our behalf, I have to get that provider to setup a custom header in the outbound email with a private cert I have generated for them. With SPF I can simply use an include: xxx to specify that I also trust vendorx.com to send mail for mydomain.com. I was inquiring if there is a facility for DKIM to support such a mechanism, which it doesn't seem like there is.

I can take a hardline with the ASPs and require they allow stamp the mail with my DKIM, but if you're not a large enough customer chances are they will say tough deal with it or go somewhere else.

How would that work with trusted partners who may send mail on your behalf? With SPF I can use an include:xxx to define relationships with other systems. With DKIM it seems I would need the partnered system to stamp the sent mail or relay off of our originating servers for DKIM attribute addition (something that might not always be possible). Is there an elegant workaround?

I use them, and what I've found is that they have a very marginal effect (if any) on spam catch rates on your inbound mail. However, they do have a great side benefit. They significantly reduce backscatter, keep yourself off of blacklists, and provide some control of you, your employer, or your client's identity on the web. SPF records provide a mechanism to limit who can spoof as you (as long as recipient servers adhere to them). If you have a risk to yourself or interested parties that someone might spoof your domain (banks!), then SPF provides a means to insure the chain of custody (to an extent).

I do think overall SPF has helped to prevent forged domain letters, but those are less and less common (for those that publish spf). The spammers now either rely on forged domains without DKIM or SPF (why not use both!!) or they send from their own controlled botnet domains and publish legit SPF for themselves as well.

I honestly don't know too much about Mandriva these days. I was an avid Mandrake user until they stir up (some time back).

Looking at the latest release notes there are some interesting things. Looks like a lot of work into 1 click install of codecs, firmware, etc...

I would still hypothesize that OpenSUSE would have the better KDE4 experience, due to the work done to KDEify Firefox and OpenOffice (though I do see Mandriva uses Go-OO). The OpenSUSE Build service as well seems to keep a lot more software options packaged for SUSE then other RPM variants (with of course Ubuntu leading the charge for prepackaged binaries).

I think I might give Mandriva another look though since it has been so long since I considered them.

Package management was god-awful in the Suse 10 release too, but I'm assuming that's been fixed by now.

It has been fixed, thank god! OpenSUSE 10 made the horrible mistake of trying to wedge in the redcarpet (ZENworks for Linux) stuff. It went horribly horribly bad. They lost a lot of people as dependency hell ensued. 10.1 was a complete rewrite of how they handled packages, and with zypper standard now (even with Yast). It's not just fixed but it is the best RPM distro at handling packages, IMO.

Eww 10.0... shudder.

Sure a few reasons;

OpenSUSE has one of the best KDE4 setups. They've done a lot of work into making KDE4 really shine. The Firefox KDE integration is AWESOME, and not something I am sure the other distros are shipping with. There is also additional work above and beyond stock on OpenOffice and such. A great attention to detail on the theming (not that you can't change that on Ubuntu and Fedora).

Zypper is hands down the best RPM tool and I would say on par or superior to Apt. Definitely a step over yum.

Nomad provide an RDP server for Linux that supports Compiz, not sure if that's been ported to other distros.

iFolder (if you care about that) is so far only packaged for SUSE, I believe.

Also Yast is great to administer your system if you're not command line friendly. It used to be atrocious, but now is very much decent. I still don't use it that much, but it has an appeal to people (especially our Windows friends). Overall it's a solid distro and I would say on par with Ubuntu and others.

The parent is absolutely right. We don't have enough details to really make a recommendation, but if the question is 'can rsync replicate 12 TB with an average rate of churn over a 1 Gbps link reliably'? The answer is an emphatic and resounding YES!

I used to maintain an rsync disaster recovery clone that was backing up multiple NetWare, Linux, Unix, and Windows servers to a central repository in excess of 20 TB over primarily 100 Mbps links. We found that our average rate of churn was 1% / day which was easily accomplished. It was all scripted out with Perl and would notify on job status each night or failures. Very easy to slap together and rock solid for the limited scope we defined.

When you get into more specifics on HA, DR recovery turn around times, maintained permissions, databases and in use files, versioning, etc.. things can get significantly more complicated.

As one of the people that would MUCH prefer this style of practice:

Is there a good way to find Doctors that practice EBM, or will I have to call around and ask each one what their take is?

The fact that there is a difference at all shows we and they were two distinct species.

I'm no geneticist, but it seems that couldn't be true. Wouldn't every evolutionary change signify a change in the genome?

At what point do you define a new species.. now 1% is probably enough to classify as that, but what about 0.01%?

Starting point of the next I meant, but I do like your literal reading as it is quite hard to think about.

I am not sure of the point of cursive writing, to be honest.

The point of cursive writing over block print was to increase the speed of writing. From Wikipedia; "Cursive is any style of handwriting that is designed for writing down notes and letters quickly by hand."

The idea being that you don't lift the writing utensil off the paper in the same word, and the end of each letter is the start point of the previous. A good cursive writer can write faster and with less effort then someone writing block. Of course a typist rules all so yes, the point of cursive is very much dead and or dying, like BSD.