From: John Leslie Sent: August 16, 2004 3:00 PM
John Leslie wrote in part:
The visible part of the iceberg of controversy is the
numerous occasions where the CSV folks have been asked why
the SPF record isn't "good enough" to serve the function of
the CSV SRV record. Also, there has been _extensive_
discussion of whether we actually need to change the version
string when moving from SPF to caller-ID. [Sender-ID] That's
the controversy I refer to.
My square brackets added.
What? You mean the CSV folks were accused of being a bunch
of slaveens by the SPF folks for not sharing. Those uppity
come from aways. Flat on the back with that:-)
(I lived in Newfoundland for 18 years, affectionately known
as the Rock. Canada's distinct 'English' province, being a
former Dominion before 1949. Newfoundland English or
Newfinese is the native tongue.)
Appreciate the clarification. I am familiar with the
Sender-ID change of version string controversy. I can go
through the archives to review the CSV/SPF discussions.
John
John Glube
Toronto, Canada
The FTC Calls For Sender Authentication
http://www.learnsteps4profit.com/dne.html
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.737 / Virus Database: 491 - Release Date: 11/08/2004