"Meng Weng Wong" <mengwong(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com> wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 10:23:33AM -0400, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
| Many slashdotters felt that authenticating the return path was "useless"
| because the end user never/rarely sees it. The website should address
| why return path authentication is important - without diminishing the
| importance of authentication at other levels.
Wayne, Greg, Mark, and I are at the MARID working group interim
meeting. Also present are Harry Katz and Jim Lyon from Microsoft
representing Caller-ID. We have agreed to converge the two proposals
that take the best of each.
The New SPF --- the result of that convergence --- will address 2822
authentication. That should make the Slashdotters happy. The New SPF
will do both the things at the top of
http://spf.pobox.com/slides/ispcon-dc/3032.html
Just to be sure I get this straight, is this a change from the way of doing
things proposed by the MARID chairs on April 29th?
| it is best
| that this working group first concentrate on creating a DNS RR
| addressing the 2821 identities and then proceed to consideration of
| 2822 identities.
I'm personally convinced that doing 2822 authentification is necessary, but
I'm wondering if the MARID group will wait until a RFC for 2822 auth is
finished before releasing a RFC for 2821 auth.
Cheers,
GFK's
--
Guillaume Filion, ing. jr
Logidac Tech., Beaumont, Québec, Canada - http://logidac.com/
PGP Key and more: http://guillaume.filion.org/