spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

OT: RE: Alternatives drafts for SUBMITTER identity

2004-09-27 19:19:40
Well now that's ironic, MS asking someone to "not use/change something someone 
else defined".

What's next, MS saying "please don't use FUD"?  :)

Terry Fielder
Manager Software Development and Deployment
Great Gulf Homes / Ashton Woods Homes
terry(_at_)greatgulfhomes(_dot_)com 
Fax: (416) 441-9085


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf-mxcomp(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org
[mailto:owner-ietf-mxcomp(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org]On Behalf Of Jim Lyon
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 8:20 PM
To: william(at)elan.net
Cc: ietf-mxcomp(_at_)imc(_dot_)org; 
spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: RE: Alternatives drafts for SUBMITTER identity



William,

SUBMITTER as defined by your draft is a different concept 
than SUBMITTER
as defined by draft-ietf-marid-submitter-xx.  Related, but different.

Your argument is that all would be well if we dropped the semantics
specified by draft-ietf-marid-submiter, and changed the specs 
to use the
semantics you supply.  While this might make everything fine from your
perspective, it doesn't from mine.  I for one decline your invitation.

Your comment that we should give the IETF and implementers a choice
about which to use is exactly on point.  The easiest way to 
do so is to
have different extensions, so that MTAs in conversation know exactly
what is meant by each other.

Since the name SUBMITTER is already in use by
draft-ietf-marid-submitter, please choose another name.


-- Jim Lyon


-------
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

<<attachment: winmail.dat>>