On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 11:01:18AM -0400, Theo Schlossnagle wrote:
When PRA comes in, with all its vague rules, it's a lot less clear to
me what
the risk of false positives will be. That turns SPF from a benefit to
a
liability. Why would I publish something that's a liability to me?
I agree completely.
I think PRA in SPFv1 puts an obstacle in a fast moving lane.
Right, and what can the members of this list do about it?? Nothing. If
microsoft decides to use v=spf1 they will just do that. Irrelevant is
what you and others think. This list is largely irrelevant for
microsoft. By pulling back your spf records, or by threatening to pull
back your spf records, you accomplish exactly this: nothing. Apart from
whatever effect it has on your liabilities, about which I frankly don't
care.
We already knew that microsoft's involvement is scaring away
implementors and developers. No need to restate that I think.
Threatening to pull back your spf records if microsoft is going to do
PRA against them is pointless.
Koen Martens
--
K.F.J. Martens, Sonologic, http://www.sonologic.nl/
Networking, embedded systems, unix expertise, artificial intelligence.
Public PGP key: http://www.metro.cx/pubkey-gmc.asc
Wondering about the funny attachment your mail program
can't read? Visit http://www.openpgp.org/