-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Julian Mehnle wrote:
I don't think the incorporation of the project and the formulation of
bylaws would [...] do the project much good (or bad, for that matter).
To be more precise: at least not in our _current_ situation. In my
platform[1] for the council election I stated that I would...
Make plans on what to do next. SPFv1.5? SPFv2? End-to-end crypto
such as S/MIME? Domain-based reputation systems (cf. SpamCop?)?
The recently canceled AMSG committee[2] was a first step in that
direction, and depending on how the RFCification of SPF turns out, it may
become worthwhile to form a body with a broader scope, perhaps also in a
legally meaningful form.
References:
1.
http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com/200411/0582.html
2. http://new.openspf.org/Council_Resolution/9
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFDIDq4wL7PKlBZWjsRAsRLAKDrE+pHD9JBeZxsR7fCVmUFes6stgCfW/vO
ykWU9E3Ff2UgIaajtf9AQmw=
=mZVB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------
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