On Wed, 8 Sep 2004, Andrew Newton wrote:
Right, but with a different syntax and storage. If we could move
forwards
now with a unified syntax and storage that would be useful.
This working group has already been through this and concluded that CSV
was sufficiently different enough in its intentions and tact that it
should not share the same DNS mechanism.
This working group has not made such a conclusion. The working group made
a conclusion that the HELO identity is different and should be pursued
separately from work being done on "from" identities represented by
CallerID and SPF, RMX and other proposals and it was decised that mechanics
offered by SPF offer best choice for futher standartization. We have
not made any conclusion about DNS mechanism that should be used for HELO
identity but agreed to let Dave Crocker and Douglas Otis work further on
their promising proposal and evaluate it in detail after SenderID work is
dealt with.
If the above is incorrect understanding about conclusions from interim
meeting in May and list discussions prior to that, then please correct me
and show at which point in the WG dicussions did we reach consensus
on dns mechanisms for HELO identity checking.
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net