-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
William Leibzon wrote:
Julian Mehnle wrote:
but then I recognized that note might actually serve to invite people
to trust the SPF spec when it says that "checking other [non-envelope]
identities against SPF version 1 records is NOT RECOMMENDED because
there are cases that are known to give incorrect results".
Ever thought of why IESG note always goes in the beginning of RFC and
not in the end? That's right - everyone reads at least the abstract and
introduction (and maybe few additional pages) but only few read all the
RFC text and notice every detail.
Still, everyone who wants to implement (or even just publish) Sender-ID
needs to read the SPFv1 spec.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFEVAXwwL7PKlBZWjsRAlynAKDNIOgttUWlURlfpyoGDHtWbHJvwQCeONlk
b3J0bOAijssYD7OvCW1RYio=
=NVUr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------
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