Chuck Mead wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
I have several thoughts about this.
1. We do not have rights to make changes to the web site right now.
Who does? There are some errors that need to be corrected.
3. I think SPF deserves its own domain name instead of riding as a
sub-domain of pobox.com.
That seems correct. OTOH, what to do about the existing and
already deployed SPF code that has an embedded URL that links to
4. A lot of people have ideas. This is a good thing
people have suggested a custom interface be built.
Uhm... I only have one question about that... why the hell
is it that everytime a net based, geek driven project
decides to update their web site they start discussing
development of new custom interfaces?
How many geeks do you know who don't like to write code?
... and if they stop, they get banned from the club.
To what end... and more over... who gives a crap? I could
take Mambo and build us a perfectly comfortable site in a
day. Others here could take their favorite CMS and do the
Yes, that would be violating this wise rule ...
Don't let the perfect become the enemy of the good.
So... what I propose we do is register a domain for spf and
then get it hosted somewhere on a CMS that several of our
number are familiar with and able to template and manage.
(1) We want the information there to be (a) available,
(b) visible, and (c) accurate.
For what it's worth, I suggest the use of static web pages
that will work on *all* browsers. ... and all readers, even
including those who signed up for their first screen name
some time yesterday.
The idea is to have them on our side ab initio --
Not to 'win' them back later; NOT to talk down to them.
(A) Lucid, plain language explanations of
SPF; eMail, eMail routing, forged headers; phishing, ...
and the use of special keys such as 'Shift' and 'Del'.
I could suggest including proper eMail and Usenet reply
and quoting style ... but I don't want to start a
religious war ... at least not here. <g>
(B) Lucid, plain language explanations with pro AND con
commentary for each of the various pending alternatives,
Domain Keys, eMail 2000, MS Sender ID framework,
whitelists, blacklists, open relay blacklists, ...
(C) References to the governing documents; and to each of
the discussion forums that are working on revisions and
(D) A FAQ about the ongoing development: must have links to
the current drafts and and relevant standards.
(E) I suggest keeping all discussions eMail based (non-HTML,
if at all possible) -- IOW, no change from what we have now.
If we need to nitpick a document, we could use specific
tags in the subject ... e.g. [DRAFT], [COMMENT SPF ver]
[REVISED SPF ver+1] ... They stand out and can be used
as incoming filter rules.
Martin G. Diehl
So much wisdom and knowledge -- so little time and bandwidth.
Reality: That which remains after you stop thinking about it.
--inspired by P. K. Dick
"Thou plenty hast, yet me dost scant"
--John Dowland (1562-1626); "The First Booke of Songs"; 1597.
Visit my online gallery: Renderosity, a 3D Artist's Community