On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 08:41:31 -0800, David Mazieres (no direct replies)
<dm-list-spf(_at_)scs(_dot_)stanford(_dot_)edu> wrote:
For this and other reasons, I'm really distressed that the Sender-ID
draft RFC specifically conflicts with SPF. The idea that SPF and
Sender-ID could co-exist side-by-side was reassuring, because if SPF
works, this means we could just ignore Sender-ID and still reduce
unwanted mail. My guess is that Microsoft was worried that if we did
this, two years from now there would be many more v=spf1 records than
spf2.0/pra records, and people would make an argument for
standardizing SPF. If they manage to coopt v=spf1 records, Microsoft
can take SPF's success and use it as an argument for standardizing
Sender-ID.
David, thanks for distilling the debate into a readable mail.
When I sense Microsoft hysteria, and there's much of it on this list,
I quit reading. I don't have time to help people with their emotional
problems. I have enough of my own. :-)
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com