This is not a joke. I am dead serious about this. I changed the subject
line.
What is quickly becoming a parody is how designs are being discussed; that
A) are not going to work very well in the first place, b) increase DNS
overhead, c) increase and promote the network transport payload and d)
violiates and conflicts with US ECPA provisions and yet doesn't even address
the two fundamental mandates of CANSPAM - true sender authentication and
topic identification.
What is disturbing about it is why I have to remind people about this. Go
figure. It took my wife today to say while I was fighting the urge to click
the send button: "You got more mail design experience than most in that
group you wasting alot of time on. It is time to speak up if you feel
Microsoft's proposal is going to change things in negative ways. Press the
send button Hector."
<Click>
--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker(_at_)verisign(_dot_)com>
To: "MARID" <ietf-mxcomp(_at_)imc(_dot_)org>
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2004 11:20 PM
Subject: RE: Sender identification is not the answer
Mr. Wong,
Sender-ID is horrible and it will alter the landscape since
Microsoft is the
author and hence, promotor. I'm so disturbed by all this,
I will begin to
inform the FCC, the Media and all that have the power to get this stop
before it gets started.
Could people please mark their messages to indicate whether the
contents are meant seriously or as a form of self-parody. I am
unable to work out which category the above fits in to.