On Aug 26, 2004, at 10:06 AM, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
What was ASKED of Microsoft was to produce a license that made it
possible to create and distribute open source code. Now that this
has happened I beleive that the ground has been shifted. I do not
see this issue being approached from the make it work point of view.
Others wishing to distribute an MUA implementation of Sender-ID may
find themselves highly disinclined to go through the trouble to do so
by the terms of the Microsoft license. [Absent reputation systems] If
I follow the specification and only check the PRA, I can do little more
than hint to the MUA user that the message might have some air of
legitimacy. If I extend the spec a bit and also check rfc2821 mail
from in an effort to reach a more firm verdict, then I have a "broken"
implementation according to Jim Lyons.
Why take the risk of Microsoft revoking the license at some future date
and incorporate the technology into an installed base of millions of
users? So I can highlight message summary lines white and yellow in
the inbox view? So I can say "apparently sent on behalf of X?" It may
not be worth it to many key constituents to make it work.