wayne wrote:
People still use UUCP and bangpaths. MTAs that haven't ever
used UUCP or bangpaths still run software that supports them.
Sure, there's nothing wrong with UUCP. Or Fido. Or avian
carriers. It's only unrelated to 2821 local-part "@" domain.
If you can convince a council member to change their vote
It's likely not important enough. But it somewhat pissed me
off when you said "there was no further discussion" in the
telechat, although there was an explanation + Mark's reply +
my pointer here.
The PermError stuff is of course much more important, getting
"auth" words right is more important, staying away from "mfrom"
might be a good idea, only "sign" is somewhat less important.
Bruce Lilly will have to get past his SPF IS EVIL! rants
first. I'm not sure that will ever happen.
If it never happens we have an RfC, that's not the worst case.
I liked the suggestion by someone that we should change
everything to Primary Domain Controller instead of domain
owner in order to reduce confusion. ;-)
LOL, I missed this one, I thought I read all. My proposal
was 1591 "designated manager" or 1983 "administrative domain"
added to the terminology as explanation for "domain owner".
It's a real issue, SPF silently assumes that "domain owners"
(= "my box, my rules") decide for their users. Where "box"
means things like aol.com
It is a game.
I'm not playing.
Yes you are. The IESG owns the stadium, they say "last call",
every gladiator wishing to attack is free to try it. Bruce
killed the language tag registry draft (with applause from the
rangs). Forced them to create the LTRU WG for another attempt.
Don't underestimate Bruce because he loves to rant. If the
worst he finds is the word "standard" in the boilerplate we
won, that's not our problem. Ned helped a lot.
Bye, Frank