RE: Article in Oakland (CA) Tribune

On Thu, 2004-10-21 at 13:00, Rand Wacker wrote:

> > Did Sendmail receive monies from Microsoft to cover the cost of Software
> > development IE: CID and then SenderID?
> As a private company that's really not your concern.  Just because I'm
> sick of you spreading FUD like this I will say that no, we did not.  We
> also did not receive any money from Yahoo for implementing DomainKeys or
> from anyone in this group to implement SPF.
It is of my concern, because it allows me attribute some level of
respect to you.  You are Rand Wacker, from Sendmail.  So?  To me you are
someone whom I just met and for the first time have heard from.  The
only thing I have to go on as regards sourcing out your motivation is
obviously your domain name.

It is further my concern because if you did take money I would most
certainly ensure 4 or 5 buckets of salt with any content of your origin.

Suffice to say I'm happy to see you state that you've received no Money
for your work and furthermore what I already knew, that there was work
being done on multiple schemes.  

> You're making it *soooo* much more inviting for us to get involved right
> now.
No one said it would be easy. :-)  But honestly, I know where to
attribute blame for the sarcastic nature of this comment, that being the
case, perhaps consider my end.

> > We needed Sendmail onboard with us back in January.  Never say its too
> > late, but perhaps you could shed some light on just what Sendmail has
> > planned for the future.  Given your title you seem the perfect
> > individual to provide some answers.
> We have been working with all the groups since before January.  We were
> some of the major proponents of merging Caller ID and SPF, and did quite a
> bit of work to bring both sides to the table.
Well this is the first time I have even seen you or had correspondence
with you, so I guess that should tell you a lot, and I assure you its
not because I wasn't available.  I've been here the entire time, and
rather vocal opponent of any merger.

I'm afraid I'm really unsure just how you thought that getting Microsoft
to work with an Open Source group was going to accomplish anything other
than software strip mining, which I hope you will agree is exactly the
case.  Now Microsoft is keeping with the name, and attempting to hijack
our records.

I realize that you are not the enemy and I shall not hold this against
you.  I don't know you, so I'll take you at your word until I should
have reason to believe otherwise.

> Now that effort hasn't worked out and we're continuing with our original
> stated intention to support all the authentication schemes that will see
> wide adoption.  If this is how the SPF community treats vendors that try
> to help with SPF then I question how viable it really is.
I can understand your position but please understand that no one person
here represents any single portion or SPF in its entirety.  Its been a
long time since thats been the case, so I should like to think that
you'll think twice before attributing my antics with anyone or anything
other than my self.  I'm not shirking accountability either.  I'm
completely justified to be miffed.  So I'm rough around the edges, I got
your attention didn't I?

> Stop slinging mud, start working the real problems.  We all share the same
> goal here.  Childish name-calling only gives the spammers more grace time.
Well now that we got that out of the way, perhaps you would care to
outline to everyone here how you can help?  I'm certainly listening.

Cheers,

James

-- 
James Couzens,
Programmer
                        ^                            ( ( (      
      ((__))         __\|/__        __|+|__        '. ___ .'    
       (00)           (o o)          (0~0)        '  (> <) '    
---nn-(o__o)-nn---ooO--(_)--Ooo--ooO--(_)--Ooo---ooO--(_)--Ooo---
http://libspf.org -- ANSI C Sender Policy Framework library
http://libsrs.org -- ANSI C Sender Rewriting Scheme library
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PGP: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x7A7C7DCF

-------
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

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part