-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
David Woodhouse wrote:
But the point is that such massive changes _aren't_ necessary. There are
plenty of alternative solutions which _don't_ require such massive
changes to the way the world works. So I disagree with your following
sentence, where you suggest that SPFv1 'achieves that goal handily'.
SPFv1 requires massive changes to infrastructure which aren't actually
necessary in order to achieve the goals which SPF sets out to achieve.
Therefore it _doesn't_ achieve your stated goal, handily or otherwise.
No other proposal, be it BATV or DKIM, requires significantly less massive
changes to infrastructure in total than SPF. _All_ proposals do require
massive changes, they only differ slightly in their optimal deployment
strategies.
You also seem to suggest that because this is an SPF list, the primary
goal should be to encourage the adoption of SPF even when it's not the
best answer to the original problem we were trying to solve. I don't buy
that -- I don't think anyone here would claim that they would favour one
solution over another for anything but technical grounds.
The thing is that many assessments of what is "best" have to rely on sub-
jective considerations, because there is just no empirical data on future
market dynamics, user/admin educatability, future development of abuse
patterns, etc. Also, the various abuse vectors aren't perceived by
everyone as equally problematic. So it is entirely natural that opinions
differ on what _will be_ the "best" solution. There is no final ultimate
solution to the spam^Wabuse problem.
There are people who are brought here, as I was many moons ago, because
of the hype which is spread about SPF and want to learn more about it.
Who spreads hype about SPF? You'd be the first for months saying that SPF
has good public relations. If SPF has a good image in public perceiption,
then perhaps it's because it does what people want. Maybe you should
accept the fact that not everyone has the same priorities you have.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFCyxMOwL7PKlBZWjsRAsdGAJsGiG/fuklUtp53bYU95+aKo2VDvgCglT6T
t/w9wJRg6AwPcpm9erqYvcU=
=Z+Uh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----