--Meng Weng Wong <mengwong(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com> wrote:
I think this thread has reached the point of diminishing
returns; while this has been a useful traversal of the
issues that will be useful for future reference, the
participants in the thread are unlikely to succeed at
changing anyone else's mind.
So i'm going to ask participants to take it offline if they
want to discuss it further.
I would further like to declare a moratorium on the subjects
of:
1) whether "-all" is wise or foolish given that verbatim
forwarding may or may not be a common practice,
2) whether (forwarders are responsible for doing SRS) or
(receivers are responsible for whitelisting forwarders).
This argument is summarized on the top right of page 11 of
http://spf.pobox.com/whitepaper.pdf. If you are unable to
view the PDF, please search the archives --- somebody has
kindly put up a web-viewable rendition.
I agree. In general, rehashing questions that are answered on
spf.pobox.com is of little value to most readers.
I think it's appropriate to refer people to the existing web materials when
repeat questions/concerns come up. Since we don't have an official FAQ for
the list itself, we should just point people to spf.pobox.com.
Now, since we don't have an official faq, there are slight problems with
the implementation. 1. how do you know what questions/concerns/topics are
appropriate and what topics have already been covered to death? Is there a
minimum reading list? 2. what do you do it if you disagree with the
official publications? A faq dedicated to the list would usually present
both sides of a debate before it's considered a complete treatment of the
frequent questions.
To that end, if anyone would like to volunteer to collect and summarize
some materials for a list FAQ, I will make sure it gets posted.
--
Greg Connor <gconnor(_at_)nekodojo(_dot_)org>