Julian Mehnle wrote:
Feel free not to participate in SPF if you don't follow
this logic.
Me thinks it's good if there are participants like Dick
sometimes telling "us" that there was (is) a SMTP world
before (without) SPF. It also helps to straighten out
some terminology issues, e.g. how to call this forward-
"thing": "forgery" is straight out, unless you like to
start a flamewar. 1123-5.3.6(a) includes it (superset),
and "251-forwarding" is actually / technically a proper
subset, so maybe "551-forwarding" nails it...
...somehow I fear that you won't consider that as funny
idea like I do, our humour is different. More serious,
one problem "we" (for a TINW including Dick) obviously
have, because there's more than only _one_ solution for
this "forward-thing" some users like David think that
"we" don't have _a_ / _any_ / _the_ solution.
The latter is certainly true, more than _one_ and _the_
are mutually exclusive.
Bye, Frank
-------
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