spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: draft: SPF community's position on MARID closing

2004-09-25 22:41:24
From: wayne
Sent: September 25, 2004 10:00 PM
 
In <x4y8izlf4u(_dot_)fsf(_at_)footbone(_dot_)midwestcs(_dot_)com> wayne
<wayne(_at_)midwestcs(_dot_)com> writes:

Maybe I'm wrong and the "SPF community" doesn't have a
problem with the PRA and the MS license, and therefore
Meng's backing of the PRA will not cost him anything.
Personally, I think it is a huge mistake to not drop the
PRA until such time as there is an acceptable license.

I have a number of questions:

* Apart from MS and networks which are administered by MS,
like some of the telephone companies, do network
administrators of other mailbox providers either big or
small who use open source software want to run PRA checks? 

* What about the technical issue concerning resent headers?

* What about the DNS load involving PRA checks?

(Would these issues meet the deleterious effects on the
overall system as being the threshold test for not going
ahead with PRA?)

* Will not being able to run PRA checks have any bearing on
open source code anti-spam software like SpamAssassin?

* Is the letter from Spiezle sufficient clarification on
the patent applications?

I ask these questions given the recent decision by AOL to
withdraw its support for marid-core and marid-pra. The
decision was technical. 

(Was AOL the big ISP which was going to run a bunch of
separate tests involving PRA and CSV?)

AOL said it was going to take SPF to beta but also likes
the new CSV. 

* Here the IESG shut down a working group and decided to
call for individual submissions, it being understood these
will be submitted to a technical review. 

Presuming the submissions are approved as experimental
proposals is there any opportunity for open comment, or
does the IESG simply bless the experimental proposals based
on the technical review?

What I would like to understand is what is the formal
procedure, once the technical review process is completed?
Is there an open last call before the IESG grants experimental
status?

* What is the scope of the individual submissions? In other
words, must the submissions be based on the existing
drafts, or is their room to amend the existing drafts?

Thanks, 

John

John Glube
Toronto, Canada

The FTC Calls For Sender Authentication
http://www.learnsteps4profit.com/dne.html



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.766 / Virus Database: 513 - Release Date: 17/09/2004
 


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