At 12:28 PM 5/23/2005 -0400, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2005, David MacQuigg wrote:
> I've posted the summary at
>
<http://purl.net/macquigg/email/IETF/authent-declare-objections.htm>http://purl.net/macquigg/email/IETF/authent-declare-objections.htm
> The statements of the objections are brief, and I hope accurate. I will
Good luck with your mission to introduce another identity to the SMTP
protocol. Since SPF is about authenticating the existing MAIL FROM
identity (despite its drawbacks), hopefully discussions of the new
ID identity will move to an appropriate list.
You must not have read the summary in the 7 minutes since I posted. This
is not a new identity, just a way to declare an existing identity. It is
no more a new identity than SUBMITTER or SRS.
This is also not a competitor to SPF. It is intended to be a universal way
to declare an ID. It should be of interest to SPF advocates, because there
will probably be *some* standard in this area, and this is your chance to
have a say in it.
If you ignore the possibility of some items becoming a shared standard, you
might waste time on development, deployment, and training for the SPF-only
alternative. What happens to SRS if some standard declaration, not
necessarily my proposal, becomes standard? What if the IESG, which is now
considering SUBMITTER, says - OK, this will be the standard if you just
delete the frivolous restrictions to PRA only. Would you rather use
SUBMITTER or the proposed ID? You may not have the choice of SRS.
--
Dave
************************************************************ *
* David MacQuigg, PhD email: david_macquigg at yahoo.com * *
* IC Design Engineer phone: USA 520-721-4583 * * *
* Analog Design Methodologies * * *
* 9320 East Mikelyn Lane * * *
* VRS Consulting, P.C. Tucson, Arizona 85710 *
************************************************************ *