Wayne,
Excellent follow-up!
Koen
On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 01:14:43PM -0500, wayne wrote:
In <20041025170706(_dot_)28EE6606(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com>
mengwong(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com (Meng Weng Wong) writes:
I just got off the phone with Paul_Roberts(_at_)idg(_dot_)com who is
writing a story on Sender ID. I gave him my opinion that it
was a good thing that MS's PRA checks could reuse v=spf1
records.
Thanks for the heads-up Meng. I sent the following message off to
Paul. Anyone who thinks I blew it with this message is free to
correct me and/or send Paul info.
Hi.
Meng Weng Wong just mentioned on the SPF-discuss mailing list that he
talked to you about Sender ID and and re-using SPF records.
I am Wayne Schlitt and I have been involved with the SPF project since
near the start, I am the author of one of the most widely used SPF
systems, and I was very active in the IETF MARID working group.
[SNIP]
As such, I believe that using SenderID with existing SPF records is
risky, and the IETF agrees. I also believe that using SenderID at all
right now is risky because there has never been a complete
specification. The technical flaws of SenderID still exist and the
IETF didn't think such problems could be resolved.
--
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/