Chuck Mead wrote:
obviously some are unaware that we are genuinely doing
things to change it.
The obvious parts are the same lame layout with the same
lame "an essential part of Sender-ID" and the same lame
"please pardon our dust", so what you say is plain wrong.
YAY! (what... no cheers?)
What's the SPF Council intending to do against the IESG
"legalization" of the massive v=spf1 abuse by PRA ? The
clock for your appeal ticks, after two months it's over
and v=spf1 is essentially dead:
Question: 20
The test is completed as soon as a better way to prevent "forgeries" is
available, or if the "PRA" abuse of v=spf1 causes too many bogus results
like the loss of legit mail or dangerous new "phishing" opportunities.