In <563960(_dot_)1087732867(_at_)[10(_dot_)12(_dot_)1(_dot_)26]> Greg Connor
<gconnor(_at_)nekodojo(_dot_)org> writes:
At any rate, the multiple headers that make up the PRA were chosen
carefully -- those are the headers that most forwarders and many MTAs
*Already* add to their forwarded mail, so many forwarders will not
have to change anything -- those that do will just need to upgrade
their MTA to the latest version or edit a config file.
This is the *claim* of the Caller-ID PRA algorithm proponents. I have
yet to see *any* data backing up the claim that it really works in
practice. This is despite pressing MS on this issue since the very
first day that Harry Katz showed up on the IETF MARID list. That was
months ago and with only a little more than a month to go before we
send the RFC off to the IESG, MS still has just been saying "trust us,
it works."
Sorry, but I just don't trust unverified claims like that. If MS
doesn't come up with code that we can test this claim on our own email
streams, I see absolutely no reason why the Caller-ID PRA algorithm
should be put into a standard-track RFC. I could see an experimental
or informational RFC, but until there is proof, this is just wishful
thinking.
-wayne