Alain,
Very nice argument...but what if, as many readers here suspect, this
"unnamed important mystery stakeholder" actually _is_ Microsoft ;-) ?
There are so many firms who are "major players" in their niche of the
Internet ecology that I think it's moot to speculate. It could be a
registrar offering some added-value, it could be a MUA or MTA software
writer, one of the big remailers or ISPs, Tom Rich, GWB, Fidel, NSA,
Mao, who knows. Politics is a messy field, but rewards can be huge.
If adapting SPF to a major player's requests means 95% adoption
worldwide in a three months time-frame, then it's well worth it. If
the major player is a firm that is almost universally hated, then it
would kill SPF, regardless of its technical merrits. As would patents.
Politics is a very messy issue, and I admire whoever has the guts to
play this ugly game, as it is disillusioning, and all you get is
complaints.
If I were in a position to decide on the future of SPF, I would stop
all discussion immediately, call the current version of SPF final
("1.0"), ask everbody to adopt it right now, and start working on
version 2.0. When I turned on my computer this morning, I had 200
mails waiting for me, 190 of them being spam, and I accidentally
deleted one of the SPF digests. Any mediocre solution that is available
and adopted today is better than that spam. XML, domain keys, and all
that are clearly a "version 2" issue and should not delay SPF.
Alain
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.9.4.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡