----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark" <admin(_at_)asarian-host(_dot_)net>
To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 10:46 AM
Subject: RE: [spf-discuss] URGENT REQUEST: Change the webpage please
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
[mailto:owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com] On Behalf Of Chuck
Mead
Sent: zaterdag 26 februari 2005 16:29
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] URGENT REQUEST: Change the webpage please
| SPF should immediately STOP referring to itself with SENDER
| ID in all ways and ignore Microsoft. All the cooperation with
| Microsoft is doing is slowing the entire process down and,
| potentially, relegating SPF to the bit bucket.
Which is exactly what the majority of the council thinks too, so you
are not alone. :-)
Although this should not be taken "ex cathedra" (as if spoken for the
entire council), as one of the people on the council, I currently operate
under the model of de facto having severed the SPF ties to Microsoft.
Hasn't happened according to Microsoft's websites, press announcements, or
the far-too-politely worded statements by folks like Meng. There is no
directly worded "this is a bad idea" statement about SenderID: that's what
it will take to sever the ties, and the associaton continues to confuse
potential users.