spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Re: CLEAR

2004-11-11 15:50:54
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004, Frank Ellermann wrote:

william(at)elan.net wrote:

 [Clear mass] 
It might be that BoFs for both of these groups will in fact
happen in Minneapolis and WGs formed shortly thereafter.

Thanks for info, I found it later on a German site, and John
added it to <http://spf-help.net/newnews.html>

Let's hope that the SES and SRS experts create some plain text
drafts soon, the alternatives of BATV / DK / SUBMIT / SPF / etc
ought to be "CLEAR" ;-) 

I would ask that the drafts and syntax be delayed. There was no
outright rejection at the CLEAR today so I'll try to proposed
formerly on their list a modification to BATV syntax that allows
it to become real Mail-From framework for adding different types
of signatures and other parameters as part of mail-from address.


MTAMARK is apparently already deployed (see ASRG).  2005 will be a very 
bad year for many spammers.
One ISP does not constitute deployment. I would much rather have common
syntax for mail policy records and have MTAMARK be part of SPF framework
as PTR scope.

P.S., please inform me if you implement 127.0.0.2 after IETF 61
I already have. 

I have checked and some are in fact adding it to allow others to check 
list integrity, but I have to emphasise that presense of this ip address in 
completewhois list WILL NOT tell you if if blacklist had been properly 
compiled, for that I recommend you use iana bogon data, such as ip
191.255.0.1 or for ARIN RIR data something like 192.3.0.1 (I'll check and
let you know about RIPE, APNIC, LACNIC ips to check on if you need it).

-- 
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net


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