On 28/07/05, wayne <wayne(_at_)schlitt(_dot_)net> wrote:
It has been a month now since the vote for the SPF domain name ended.
The clear winner was openspf, and I think most people assumed that
this meant openspf.org.
Unfortunately, I have so far been unable to get the transfer of the
openspf.org domain name started. I have emailed James Couzens about a
half dozen times since then. I have received two emails in return,
but none since the July 11th.
What do people think about either using something like openspf.info
instead of openspf.org and hope that openspf.org never falls into the
wrong hands?
What do people think about skipping the openspf domain names and going
with the second place finisher, spf-classic.org?
What was the reason that we chose 'openspf' in the first place?
Why not have SPF-Classic specification on spf-classic.org? What would
naturally make more sense than going to spf-classic.org to see the
specification for, guess what, SPF-Classic?! :-)
I think that spf-classic.org and SenderPolicy.org are the way to go,
and the results of the vote should be abandoned. Come on, it's just 34
users that have participated (including myself) -- in no way it
represents everyone who is or might be interested in SPF. Such
decisions as this should not be made by a popular vote, but by
something that makes more sense and is going promote the community and
make things easy going.
There are already too many projects that use 'Open' as a prefix. I
already stated my opinion about the dilution of the OpenBSD projects
by an 'OpenSPF' name. Separate OpenBSD projects all share 'Open'
prefix and a three-letter suffix. All of those "OpenBSD brands" make
sense, 'cause if you remove the 'Open' part of the brand, you get the
name of the original solution that was improved by Theo and his crew.
I must tell you, I always used to confuse OpenSSL and OpenSSH. The
first one is not from the OpenBSD crew, the second one is. Both are
very popular brands, though.
OpenBSD is much more popular than OpenVMS. Google scores are 4 million
pages for OpenBSD vs. 1 million pages for OpenVMS, so it's too late to
make a case here; but thanks for noting, Michael Parson. :-)
OpenOffice is also a cool name; it in no way dilutes OpenBSD brands (I
don't think I need to comment on this any further).
If someone hasn't yet noticed, there are no references to openspf in
the SPF-Classic draught submitted to IETF
<URL:http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02.txt>.
It comes as a surprise that openspf.org/info/com/net is going to
suddenly become a home to the SPF-specification, as opposed to already
advertised and well-known SPF-Classic[.org] and Sender Policy[.org]
names.
If this is not enough, just consider that there are already two
popular projects that use OpenSxx names. The 'xx' part of OpenSPF is
PF. Notwithstanding, PF stands for Packet Filter :-), again an
OpenBSD-brand getting more and more acceptance each day (now
intergrated with FreeBSD as an alternative to ipfw). (Google for 'pf'
gives me http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/ as the first result and
http://www.benzedrine.cx/pf.html as the third result, both official
OpenBSD's pf(4) pages.) Guys, Theo is gonna sue you. :-) Just
kidding. But you never know. :-)
Cheers,
Constantine.
P.S. Try google for 'openspf'. I get a 'Did you mean: openssl' behind
the query box.