In <20040906193031(_dot_)16757(_dot_)qmail(_at_)tom(_dot_)iecc(_dot_)com> John
Levine <johnl(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com> writes:
[proposed alternative to the PRA deleted]
If there's interest in this, I'd be happy to help write it up as an
I-D. [...]
As much as I would love to discuss this, the co-chairs are repeatedly
asked us to not discuss alternative proposals until such time as we
are finished working on the current I-Ds. I realize this puts us in
somewhat of a awkward situation, since many people saying, in effect,
that we must go forward with SenderID because it is the only thing
around.
As usual for threads, there has been a certain amount of topic drift,
in this case into the subject of what the PRA and various other
similar algorithms are trying to accomplish. I think this is an
interesting topic and it isn't clear to me that what the PRA is trying
to accomplish and the "identitity" that it creates is all that useful.
However, I'm not sure that the co-chairs are even interesting in
seeing a drawn out discussion on this either. I think we were
supposed to discuss that May.
As a result of those discussions back in May, the co-chairs ruled that
we would focus on RFC2821 identities, and the charter says that
discussions of other identities would be ruled out of order.
-wayne