In
<Pine(_dot_)LNX(_dot_)4(_dot_)44(_dot_)0409021533250(_dot_)15101-100000(_at_)sokol(_dot_)elan(_dot_)net>
"william(at)elan.net" <william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net> writes:
Alternatives are in fact available, but those who know about it can not
share it right now since WG chairs have requested that until last call is
completed that people on this list evaluate current drafts that are based
on Sender-ID proposal.
I have given Ryan a short answer offlist, but this restriction on
discussing alternatives kind of puts us in a catch-22.
I can understand the reasons why the co-chairs don't want the extra
destractions, but RFC3669 talks about comparing with alternatives. If
I discuss alternatives, I will get in trouble with the co-chairs. If
I don't discuss the alternatives, people who have come in late to the
game will likely think that there is no choice but to accept SenderID.
-wayne