In <03e701c56de3$4e0c7450$6c62fea9(_at_)ibmrkydk2ufvdd> "John Glube"
<jbglube(_at_)sympatico(_dot_)ca> writes:
This statement improperly impugned someone you claim to
respect.
Ok John.
I'm glad you were so even handed and also took SRS to task of
impunging people and his suggestions of motivations of others when you
responsed to his article. </sarcasm>
* The attack you made may be acceptable among engineers,
software programmers and technologists. However, in my view,
it does nothing to improve the standing of SPF in the
broader online community.
Yep, and SRS's comments were apparently a-ok with you on a news site.
* I reiterate my position that to avoid a collision between
the presumptions behind the SPFv1 protocol and the need for
email delivery, the SPF council should take heed to the
suggestions being made to revise the protocol, which I have
referenced in this thread.
Unless you have a time machine and can go back and change things in
2003, most of what I remember you suggesting simply can not be done.
More over, I don't think what you suggested would reach a rough
consensus on being appropriate.
Go ahead folks and bang away, but after you have done so,
take some time to reflect.
I hope you do to John.
-wayne