On Thu March 3 2005 13:13, wayne wrote:
(Actually, off hand, I can't think of anything about SPF
that Dave does like, but...)
He's not alone...
They are pushing through both this SPF I-D, and the
Microsoft Sender-ID I-Ds, apparently without even an IETF last call.
That would be a procedure violation, and could be appealed to the IAB.
The IETF seems to be a pretty funny organization. They clearly value
politics over technical considerations.
That's quite a broad brush you're trying to paint with. Perhaps
you fail to understand some of the technical arguments against SPF...
I'm not sure that I want to
go through the effort of trying to create a working group, knowing
that I don't have the political clout to keep things focused on
technical issues.
Is that a perverse way of stating that a) those who understand the
technical issues aren't interested in SPF and/or b) those who are
interested in SPF are unable or unwilling to confront its technical
defects?