spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: PRA - purported responsible address

2004-08-29 10:56:06
At 01:31 PM 8/29/2004 -0400, you wrote:
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.

I was thinking more of changes to Microsoft software which makes SPF not 
function without CallerID.

For example, email that crosses an Exchange server (in either direction).  You 
are talking about a lot of business e-mail.

Possibly also they can muck with the envelope data between their clients and 
SMTP.  Have not really analyzed that yet.

I leave for 3 days now.