spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

[spf-discuss] SenderID *CANNOT* become an Internet Standard

2005-12-08 09:02:34
In 
<Pine(_dot_)LNX(_dot_)4(_dot_)62(_dot_)0512080709430(_dot_)19913(_at_)sokol(_dot_)elan(_dot_)net>
 "william(at)elan.net" <william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net> writes:

                                 Additionally it notes that SID algorithm 
is also known to be incompatible with existing standards and as is can
never become a full standard.

Ya know, the more I think about it, the more significant I think this
is.

The IESG has said that SenderID *CANNOT* become an Internet Standard
without making seriously incompatible changes.  


One does not need to be a genius to choose superior product after all
that, so this gives pretty good hand at marketing SPF as being a lot 
better then SID. However I'm afraid SPF community [considering Meng's 
support for SID] may not be able to take advantage of this opportunity 
documented and confirmed by IETF.

I suspect that the news of the appeals will hit the press eventually.
I would like to see something positive come out of it, but I suspect
that all that will happen is that this will be portrayed as being a
reason to use DKIM, rather than SPF.  Moreover, since the SPF
community has been trying to distance itself from SenderID, I'm not
sure that we, as an official group, should any stance on the problems
with SenderID and the abuse of the resent-* headers.  We haven't taken
any stance on the problems with DKIM and mailing lists, or MTAMark, or
DNSBLs, or any other anti-spam/anti-forgery system.


-wayne

-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>