In
<Pine(_dot_)LNX(_dot_)4(_dot_)44(_dot_)0412091437000(_dot_)17864-100000(_at_)neko-base(_dot_)nekodojo(_dot_)org>
Greg Connor <gconnor(_at_)nekodojo(_dot_)org> writes:
SPF is an open protocol and its use is not controlled or licensed.
The SPF protocol and language is flexible and it is our hope that
the same language can be successfully applied in other contexts
having to do with email forgery. Microsoft's PRA (part of SenderID)
is one such use where the SPF language can be applied to other
purposes.
I think this part is unclear. If you are saying that MS should use
the same SPF language in a different record, then I can agree. If you
are saying that MS should use the same SPF record, then I can't agree.
I think many people will gloss over the word "language" and interpret
this paragraph as saying that it is ok, and even encouraged, for
SenderID to use SPF.
-wayne