John Hinton wrote:
Perhaps a weekly summary would be a good thing?
Sure, the new SPF-council will have minutes, but it's not yet
clear how and where they are published, but public it will be.
I'm really surprised this only got one response.
I kept your original article as "unread", because the answer
at the moment is not exactly what you wanted. And maybe it's
now obsolete, and I'll find Julian's minutes within the next
hour.
I'm sorry, but I simply need a 'report' on the state of
affairs. I just can't keep up with this list.
The council was elected to get an "official standard" a.s.a.p.
It will be something like Wayne's draft-schlitt-01 minus some
minor issues. The result will be submitted as Internet draft.
It will reflect the installed v=spf1 base (again minus some
minor technical details).
This does leave the door wide open for Microsoft to push its
Sender-ID on all of us 'uninformed'
Yes, that's the strategy of the distractors, please ignore it.
we desparately need some public information on where SPF is
right now.
See http://www.OpenSPF.org/OpenSPF_community_position_v103.html
signed by most active SPF supporters. And if your state is
September 2004 http://spf-help.net/news.html has fresher info.
(September news is very old and inaccurate now).
Yes, it was before "they" killed MARID as some "compromise"
between Sender-ID and all wannabe-FUSSP-inventors.
Of course "they" never discussed any real solutions like SPF,
MTAMARK, BATV, or CSV, because real solutions are the natural
enemies of any commercial snake-oil.
please understand that I desparately want SPF to succeed.
Sure, and snake-oil producents desperately want SPF to fail :-(
Anything even remotely related to anti-spam or AV is not only
big business today, it's an industry. Their worst nightmare
is something that actually works when it's not a part of their
products. <sigh>
Bye, Fra