On 9/12/13 12:10 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Michael Thomas <mike(_at_)mtcc(_dot_)com
<mailto:mike(_at_)mtcc(_dot_)com>> wrote:
The list of things DMARC does that ADSP doesn't in its appendix, is a
trip down memory lane
of constraints that were placed on it by the
against-it-before-they-were-for it set. True
SPF wasn't ever on its radar -- SPF has its own policy language, so
nobody wanted to touch
that. And ARF was progressing at the time as it's own spec, so we weren't
completely clueless
about its need. But instead of actually working to make a better spec at
the time, we had an
author whose goal was to subvert it, and endless idiotic flamewars about
what the actual name
of the draft should be as the main priorities. The really sad thing about
this is that they pissed
away 6+ years due to the intrigue.
I'm lost. What's the purpose of this branch of the original thread, other
than venting old frustration and lobbing invective?
That we pissed away 6 years for no good reason.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html