spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Distrowatch article on SPF

2004-07-30 10:32:49
Robert Storey wrote:
I joined this list for a selfish reason. I'm writing an article about
SPF for the Distrowatch Weekly News. I'd be very appreciative if a few
people here would look at it first and see if I've made any factual
errors. I don't want to spread misinformation, and whenever I write an
article about some project I try to give the developers a chance to see
the story before it gets published. I just think it's a good
journalistic practice, and more fair to the developers.

Anyway, the draft of the story can be found here:

http://colonelpanic.org/weekly.html

Hi Robert,

I have a few comments:

First, your article seems biased against Microsoft; I don't know if it's wanted, but that's the impression I get from reading it.

Second, after reading your article, some people may think that Microsoft's proposal (Caller-ID) is a clone of SPF but encumbered by patents. That's not the case, Caller-ID is aimed at authenticating the "From:" header of an email message, while SPF is aimed at athenticating the return-path. They were merged to authenticate both with a single protocol.

Later, you say that: "The big problem is that nobody is even sure what patents Microsoft holds, but for sure there is one on XML XML which would effect SenderID." It has been decided by the MARID chairs that, for technical reasons, there's not going to be any XML in the standard.
See http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/mail-archive/msg02349.html

I beleive that the Microsoft patent is about the algorithm used to get the purposed reponsible address (PRA) from the email headers. Also, from what I understand, the IETF chairs asked Microsoft to come up with an unrestricted license before the next IETF meeting (I think it's August 4th). If Microsoft does not comply, I guess they will remove the PRA from the standard and replace it with something else.

You also link to the first email that RMS posted on the mailing list. This email gives me the impression that RMS doesn't know what he's talking about. He gives a better explanation of his position in: http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/mail-archive/msg02879.html

Best,
GFK's
--
Guillaume Filion, ing. jr
Logidac Tech., Beaumont, Québec, Canada - http://logidac.com/
PGP Key and more: http://guillaume.filion.org/


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>