spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Agenda item: SenderID Position Statement

2004-12-09 23:47:03
Thanks Andy, Alex and Frank for the replies. I'll make some changes tomorrow and circulate it around again.

gregc


--Andy Bakun <spf(_at_)leave-it-to-grace(_dot_)com> wrote:

On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 16:42, Greg Connor wrote:
Team-

Since "reuse of v=spf1 records" seems to be the most pressing issue, I
have  written a "position statement" that addresses inappropriate reuse
and doesn't  address other issues (PRA license or technical problems).
...
Link:
http://nekodojo.org/~gconnor/spf-context-usage.txt

Thanks Greg.  I don't like how it specifically mentions Microsoft and
PRA by name (unlike my original short paragraph, but I was going for
something to be included in a standards document, rather than something
that is more along the lines of a position statement), but overall, this
accurate reflects *my* SPF context usage position.

Andy.


-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Read the whitepaper!  http://spf.pobox.com/whitepaper.pdf
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



--
Greg Connor <gconnor(_at_)nekodojo(_dot_)org>