<rant>
In the classic style of humanity - every new generation has to learn
everything the hard way. Ever since I came on these lists I've been saying
that MS has a corporate need and their philosophy is based on aquisition, so
*anything* they touch will become theirs.
Meng didn't make a deal with the devil, he made a totally naive deal with
the biggest predator on earth. I can forgive him that as he was probably
badly advised within IETF and elsewhere. The upshot is the same however.
_*ALL*_ versions of SPF will now be taken in by MS. Read Anne Mitchells
post again - lawyers include everything they can think of, and then add a
few catch-all sentences in case they missed something. Make _NO_ mistake MS
will be doing exactly that and will take everything they can get because
they know it'll take a fortune to defend it or overturn the decision.
This is *not* an anti-MS rant. I understand their corporate philosophy only
too well. In business I have done exactly the same thing (in a different
sphere of operations). I *am* amazed that MS have become so powerful when
alternatives are available, but that's another topic I'd happily chew over
with whoever wants.
To go back to my opener -
The internet community has a half-life of about a year, with some notable
exceptions. Thus every year we are doomed by pushy newbies getting to the
top of IETF, or whatever decision-making group you care to name. They
examine standards made by technical wizards and creative thinkers who have
zero commercial sense and the result is . . . well, now you know the
result!
My 35 years in the seriously hard and fast world of international business
has taught me these things. I try to pass on my knowledge, but I am only one
voice in a babble of excited children. No offense intended to anyone in
particular - I generalise for the sake of making the point forcibly.
</rant>
phew - that's better :-)
Slainte,
JohnP.
johnp(_at_)idimo(_dot_)com
ICQ 313355492
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Brodbeck" <gull(_at_)gull(_dot_)us>
To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2004 4:40 AM
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] Microsoft released more info Aug 30, 2004
On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 15:41:22 -0700, Jonathan Gardner wrote
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 01 September 2004 02:06 pm, jpinkerton wrote:
I believe you can now think of spf as being MS property unless you're
prepared to fight them :-(
Yes, we made a deal with the devil.
When Meng originally signed things over to Microsoft, a lot of people said
that. At the time, I thought they were overreacting. Now I see they were
right all along.
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
http://www.InboxEvent.com/?s=d --- Inbox Event Nov 17-19 in Atlanta
features SPF and Sender ID.
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com