On Thu, 2004-09-30 at 23:55 -0500, wayne wrote:
SES has certainly been discussed on this list, and ABBS should have
been when SES and BATV were discussed. I would like to know if *this*
(proposed) working group is still considering them or if they have
been moved to CLEAR. If CLEAR is just about BATV, then I'm guessing
that SES and ABBS will be still be discussed here.
I have to admit I haven't been paying a huge amount of attention in the
past few days, but I believe it was decided that SES was outside the
scope of what people wanted to cover in CLEAR.
That seems strange to me -- SES and BATV are basically the same thing in
principle. SES just presents a few more options for how you can _use_
BATV addresses, that's all -- like a stunt DNS server and something
equivalent to the SPF 'exists' mechanism, etc. And the option of putting
a message-digest into the reverse-path which get validated. While BATV
is a minimal 'spec' to capture the essence of the idea, SES takes it
further. I think it makes sense to discuss them in the same forum.
--
dwmw2