In <1086606218(_dot_)13972(_dot_)53(_dot_)camel(_at_)code3> James Couzens
<jcouzens(_at_)6o4(_dot_)ca> writes:
[....] An agreement with MS allows us to present a
consistent story to MARID, which I think is crucial to getting an RFC
drafted and approved.
We already HAD an RFC being considered did we not?
The old SPF RFC is now off the table. At the interim meeting, it was
decided to go with 2822 data instead of 2821 data. Proposals such as
the old SPF may be brought up late, after an something like pure
caller-id or the "new spf" is finished.
At the IETF meeting, the merged SPF/C-ID was presented as a way of
getting rid of SRS (via the RFROM/FRED extension), and to validate the
2822 From: address. I know of no one who likes SRS, it is just plain
ugly, so getting rid of it was quite popular. I personally think that
validating the From: address is very important, as do many others.
Jim Lyon said that the Caller-ID algorithm would work for "95% of all
email senders", that it had far fewer problems than SPF (forwarders),
and it would work well. As a result, it was happily accepted.
There was a hum taken as to whether the IETF should work on the
RFC2822 data instead, and vote was "yes". (I guess. it is hard to
tell)
Someone remind me to send the DNS admin @ AOL a box of chocolates this
Christmas because they not only put the puck in our zone, they moved the
centre back behind the opposing team's net! For those of you who are
That would be Carl Hutzler, I believe. He is the anti-spam person at
AOL rather than the DNS admin though. And yes, I would like to say a
big THANK YOU to Carl also!
-wayne