Jonathan Gardner wrote:
MARKETING. We need to keep marketing. And the best way is grass-roots. Make
sure you keep preaching the gospel on SPF. I think we need to do some effort
to refine the message we convey, and to come to an agreement over how we are
going to say it. I propose something like "SPF doesn't stop spam, but it is
one of the key steps to solving spam." Or "SPF prevents forgeries." When we
come together as a community and get on the same message and spread that
message throughout the internet and society, we will be heard.
You have to look at this politically and not technically. What can you say to
convince someone to publish SPF records that doesn't right now? What issues
do they have? What can you say or do to change their mind? Think emotions.
Think feelings. We have to change hearts and minds.
We should probably put someone in charge of leading the marketing effort and
let them put together a message and a campaign.
We lack a volunteer to do this job. Anybody...
TECHNICAL SUPPORT. We are doing a pretty good job here. I think we can still
do a bit better. But I'm not exactly sure how, so I'll just be quiet. We must
be vigilant and look for ways to do better. Do we have a "Director of
Technical Support" to take charge of this? I think we need someone like this.
I think that to the extent we have one, it's me. I got deputized by
Meng and then by the Council to run the spf-help list. I've also been
making sure that queries through the web site get answered (thanks to
the RT that Koen Martens provides).
There are other volunteers (thanks to the people who've been helping
out, I've had less to do recently and that's greatly appreciated). I
think we are in pretty good shape here, but any suggestions are welcome.
NEXT STEP. We have to move on to the next step. What is the next step?
Reputation services. I wish I had time to work on this. I'm sure if someone
took the lead some folks from our company would silently contribute to the
effort. What already exists? What are their technical and political
limitations?
Myself I see the next step as seeing what we can do with modifiers to
extend the utility of SPF and integrate with other methods. I believe
that as an envelope method, it makes great sense for the SPF record to
be the place where efficient discovery of other supported methods could
be done.
I believe that there will never be a v=spf1.1, 2, or 3. What we got is
what we got. Best to figure out what we can do with it.
Reputation inevitably inolves heuristics. If you want to jump from
anti-forgery to anti-spam, I think it's probably necessary.
I would like to find ways to do less heuristics and more deterministic
things.
Scott K
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com