On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Hector Santos wrote:
William,
I agree with Jim from the standpoint there is a conflict here in regards to
"protesting" a patent application, yet at the same time, giving it some
level of credence. In my view, this plays into the favor of the patentee.
How so?
I took the draft that Microsoft has no IPR claims on (since Microsoft
person was co-author, if it was not so, he would have had to file IPR
document in regards to that draft). However that draft in itself was
referencing as requirement another draft (PRA) that had known IPR issues.
I removed the requirement of Submitter identity being the same as
patent-encumbered PRA identity and made SUBMITTER to be purely RFC2821
identity on part with ReturnPath. Situation is such that Microsoft can
not claim have patent claims on this draft unless it is at the same time
willing to put claims on SPF (which as you say they will not be able to do).
So the result is that we have subpart of SenderID that:
1. Provides information about entity that was last involved
in reintroduction of message into transport stream. This
is what many wanted.
2. Does not require checking RFC2822 headers to find this identity.
3. Does not require forwarders to add new headers in a way that is
not compatible with RFC2822
5. Can be implemented by every MTA no matter if they can use GNU
license or commercial license for their product
This is not in conflict with Microsoft SenderID concept as that can
be easily build upon it by requirying finding PRA identity from
headers to be the same as SUBMITTER identity. To make certain that
is what publisher wanted to be checked it is easily possible to do
it by means of SPF policy records which do use different scope.
I note that, as indicated in another post, I made best effort to take
concepts of SenderID that did not have any major technical or IPR issues.
I believe this allows the concept to be implemented worldwide while if
that is not done, we'd have situation that Responsible Submitter identity
would not be provided by majority of MTA servers.
What I have done should in fact greatly help Microsoft itself by allowing
Responsible Submitter identity to be present and certainly determined in a
lot more cases then what it otherwise would have been.
---
William Leibzon, Elan Networks:
mailto: william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net
Anti-Spam and Email Security Research Worksite:
http://www.elan.net/~william/emailsecurity/