On Tue, 30 Mar 2004, Carsten Kuckuk wrote:
CID and SPF can coexists. They don't interphere with each other. I
don't see any reason to call for a boycott. Fighting spam is a
multi-layered thing, and the more sieves you have, the better. If
somebody ever starts doing bad things, I have a strong trust in the
forces of the market. Let the users sort out what is good and what is
not.
The only problem I have with CID is if MSFT published only CID data,
and no SPF data. That leaves me with no way to distinguish forged
hotmail.com and msn.com email without paying the MSFT license.
If MSFT insists on offering only CID data (and that kind of behaviour
is typical for them), then my customers will get the choice of paying an extra
fee to be able to receive Microsoft email without extra spam.
The other nefarious action that MSFT could take is to refuse to accept
email without CID - but require an (annual, no doubt) license fee to publish
CID data.
The fact that Microsoft has a history of that kind of behaviour counts
against CID regardless of its technical merits.
Users will not understand what is happening well enough to rationally
respond to MSFT actions like the above.
--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Very few of our customers are going to have a pure Unix
or pure Windows environment." - Dennis Oldroyd, Microsoft Corporation