In <m3hdscomn5(_dot_)fsf(_at_)asfast(_dot_)com> Lloyd Zusman
<ljz(_at_)asfast(_dot_)com> writes:
Meng Weng Wong <mengwong(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com> writes:
Microsoft has in the past seemed very eager to accommodate
us, so I have every hope that things will turn out well.
Once we have any news, we'll report.
In this situation, no news is *not* good news. I am planning on
raising the issue on the IETF list. (Not creating a stink, I hope,
just making sure that people don't forget about it.)
Microsoft has a long track record of opposing and trying to thwart
opensource efforts ... both actively and underhandedly. I hope that the
current CID/SPF cooperation represents a true change of heart on their
part, and not just a ploy to co-opt the opensource SPF effort and then
run it into the ground to enhance the viability of their own,
non-opensource solutions.
MicroSoft, like all corporations, is made up of individuals. In the
case of the people from MS that I have talked to about SPF, I think
they honestly want to just get this working and don't care about the
licensing issues. However, they do not speak for MS and they have to
go through MS lawyers.
I suspect that, in the case of SPF, the MS delays in getting this
resolved is simply a matter of too much internal bureaucracy.
I also suspect that MS's cooperation with SPF does not mean that the
entire company has changed.
-wayne