On Dec 9, 2005, at 11:37, Frank Ellermann wrote:
Adding an "IESG note" to the v=spf1 spec. how participants
of this "experiment" could "opt-out" from the PRA-experiment
by adding dummy PRA-records, where this in practice doesn't
work, is pointless.
For SPF-"experiment" read about 1.000.000 published policies
with about 10 independent interoperable implementations, and
for PRA-experiment read "nobody really uses or wants PRA".
Folks,
Doesn't this say it all? No one, other than Microsoft, is using
Sender-ID/PRA. I think that is due to DomainKeys and its follow-ons
being a better solution in most folks eyes. PRA is DOA.
While I support the appeal to the IAB, we may be arguing over
something with IETF that is already moot.
Andrew
____________________________________
Andrew W. Donoho
awd(_at_)DDG(_dot_)com, PGP Key ID: 0x81D0F250
+1 (512) 453-6652 (o), +1 (512) 750-7596 (m)
"To take no detours from the high road of reason and social
responsibility."
-- Marcus Aurelius
-------
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