esr(_at_)thyrsus(_dot_)com (Eric S. Raymond) wrote on 23.10.04 in
<20041023040713(_dot_)GA25605(_at_)thyrsus(_dot_)com>:
shogunx <shogunx(_at_)sleekfreak(_dot_)ath(_dot_)cx>:
In what way? Microsoft now knows that with the mere threat of a patent
it either can shut down IETF standards work it dislikes or seize control
of the results through the patent system. The IETF has dignaled that it
will do nothing to oppose or prevent these outcomes.
How so Eric? Could you give an example of potential weakness in the
IETF process that could be exploited? So perhaps we could start
patching? How would such a patent based denial of service attack scenario
play out?
Watch what happens with anti-spam "standards" in the next nine months.
I fear it's not going to be pretty.
So ... do we actually need one in the first place? I'm certainly
unconvinced of that. And from all I heard, SPF is certainly *not*
something I like; the basic idea seems fundamentally flawed to me, and
AFAICT that is the same idea as is behind SenderID.
MfG Kai
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf