Re: Stay on Topic - STOP CHANGING THE DAMN TOPIC

Who made you the list administrator or moderator?

I would prefer that you quit changing the damn topic when it suits you!  Its
#$%ing annoying!

--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com


----- Original Message -----
From: "David MacQuigg" <dmquigg-spf(_at_)yahoo(_dot_)com>
Newsgroups: spf.-.sender.policy.framework.discussion
To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 10:32 AM
Subject: [spf-discuss] Stay on Topic


> I long ago stopped reading this thread, and I suspect others have as well.
>
> Please change the subject line when the discussion wanders off the
original
> topic.  Long, wandering threads are useless in an archive, and any good
> information gets buried.
>
> -- Dave
>
> At 09:57 AM 4/14/2005 -0400, Hector Santos wrote:
>
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Tony Finch" <dot(_at_)dotat(_dot_)at>
> > Newsgroups: spf.-.sender.policy.framework.discussion
> > To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 9:09 AM
> > Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] DNS Loading Comparison
> >
> >
> > > I've implemented it.
> > One administrator patch doesn't count.  :-)
> >
> > What SMTP product/server are you using?  EXIM? Are you the author of
Exim?
> > Can you give maybe 100 or so  CSV domain ready systems, if not  just 5 or
> > 10?   Does AOL, MICROSOFT and other major vendors support CSV?   I mean,
if
> > AOL and other major sources of spam did not defined SPF policies,  it
would
> > be hard to justify SPF.   If AOL or MICROSOFT add support for CSV,  I
will
> > add it.  if not, "forget about it."  Why bother?
> >
> > > Why do you think AUTH and CSV have anything to do
> > > with each other?
> > If you implemented CSV, you should know the issue.
> >
> > An ESMTP AUTH conversation is a serials of commands after the EHLO.   CSV
> > promotes NO concepts of delayed verification - you proved it in your
> > previous reply when you blabbed out, " Irrelevant" and  "Not within CSV's
> > scope."
> >
> > You said "irrelevant" to ESMTP AUTH which means that you are either doing
an
> > open ended HELO/EHLO check or you are waiting to see if the user is using
> > ESMTP AUTH to authentication, in which case, at this point, CSV is
> > irrelevant and unnecessary.
> >
> > You said "Not Within CSV's scope" to deal with considerations of checking
> > other process parameters to see if the mail could even be delivered in
the
> > first place
> >
> > To apply CSV to authenticated users or mail that can not be delivered is
a
> > waste and overhead.  In the case of CSV, to the tune of atleast 80%
overhead
> > since atleast 80% of the return paths are spoofed or NXDOMAIN.
> >
> > A chicken and egg problem.  Hey, don't worry. SPF has the same issue
too -
> > 50-65% overhead because it needs to atleast check RCPT first!
> >
> > > > That explains why CSV is not within anyone's scope neither! :-)
> > > You seem to want every specification to solve every problem.
> > We have designed, developed and market for the past 1.5+ years a system
> > called WCSAP that implements an integrated _suite_ of various AVS
protocols.
> > I think that should negate your untrue presumptions about what I want.
> >
> > ----
> > Hector Santos, CTO
> > Santronics Software, Inc.
> > http://www.santronics.com
> > http://www.winserver.com/wcsap (Wildcat! Sender Authentication Protocol)
> > http://www.winserver.com/spamstats  (WcSAP Anti-Spam Stats)
>
> -------
> 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