spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Re: [SPF v1 Draft] Last chance before I submit...

2004-10-19 08:50:41

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Brodbeck" <gull(_at_)gull(_dot_)us>
To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 5:43 PM
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] Re: [SPF v1 Draft] Last chance before I submit...


On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 17:10:25 +0200, Koen Martens wrote
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.

I understand that.  What I'd like to avoid is an official *standard* that
endorses the use of SPFv1 with PRA checks.  Maybe I'm mistaken, but I've
gotten the distinct impression that things are headed that direction.

Well the draft now submitted doesn't include PRA and the drafts under
development don't include PRA, so who told you that SPF was going to include
PRA?



By pulling back your spf records, or by
threatening to pull back your spf records, you accomplish exactly
this: nothing.

I'm just stating my position. I didn't really think anyone change their
mind
just based on whether or not I intend to publish.  But I was trying to
illustrate how I think a lot of domain owners will view this.

Appreciated - but positive chat would be more constructive and helpful to
spf's future - based on the facts - not the hearsay ;-)  Even if you are
only a user of spf and not a specific supporter/worker, you'll appreciate
the result of your talking up spf  :-)


Slainte,

JohnP.
johnp(_at_)idimo(_dot_)com
ICQ 313355492


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