--wayne <wayne(_at_)midwestcs(_dot_)com> wrote:
The extremists in the SPF community who hate Microsoft can
do two things:
Claiming that people who are against the PRA are extremists and that
they hate Microsoft is like claiming that people who are against
apartheid hate whites. It is very insulting and shows that you are
completely missing the point.
Actually I don't think that was the point at all. There are "people who
are against the PRA" and "extremists who hate Microsoft" and Meng's
original post shows them as different (and gives recommendations for each).
If you are against the PRA, the challenge is to articulate why you believe
it should be specifically excluded. If I'm buying 54 gallons of SPF
because I think it will be effective at cleaning my driveway, I probably
have a rude awakening coming. How does it benefit us, the sellers of SPF,
to keep people from using SPF for some other purpose, or trying to? Would
you want to write in the spec that Greg is silly and Greg should not be
allowed to buy 54-gallon drums of SPF? Or would you rather continue to
represent SPF as free and open for any user, even Sender ID, even if Sender
ID isn't itself free?
Anyway. I think it's a good idea to continue developing SPF and publishing
it as an experimental RFC, and I think trying to prevent MS from
inter-operating with SPF is a waste of time and effort.
--
Greg Connor <gconnor(_at_)nekodojo(_dot_)org>