On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 12:10:30AM -0700, Phil Karn wrote:
|
| With message signatures, no kludgey changes to the DNS or to mail
| servers are required. All the work can be done at the end points, and
| the choice whether to accept or ignore a certain message is under
| recipient control where it belongs. And I can continue to send my email
| direct to its recipients from any IP address I happen to be visiting.
|
I'm all for S/MIME or GPG.
The goal of SPF is different: to do the work at the hubs, so end users
who aren't technically savvy enough to do cryptomail still enjoy the
benefits. SPF puts the burden on ISPs to keep things more or less
backward-compatible.
If you are interested in S/MIME and GPG solutions, I believe ASRG has a
track devoted to that sort of thing.
In the meantime, until that solution is globally implemented and I can
confidently reject any mail that isn't signed, we'll keep moving forward
with SPF.
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡