Re: PRA - purported responsible address

AccuSpam wrote:

> <>Microsoft does not need to patent SPF and/or PRA in order to make it 
> irrelevant in future. All they have to do is make all their programs 
> that process e-mail, do it in way that the anti-forgery information 
> can only be extracted via using their patent. Then we are all stuck 
> licensing their patent and following their standard.
I don't see this as an issue, really.  The great thing about SPF is you 
get *some* benefit (stopping joe-job bounces) even with no email client 
support.