-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Frank Ellermann wrote:
William Leibzon wrote:
Fixing small bugs in protocol is however ok.
Deprecating optional cruft (unused features) should also work. or at
least that's what I think what PS to DS can do. Adding new features
could cause a reset on the standards track.
For SPF it's not exactly the same, it's "experimental", and if that makes
any sense integrating any "lessons learned" in 4408bis is okay. "Add
wild and wonderful features" isn't a lesson I've learned.
I'm not sure we can actually deprecate optional cruft and fix bugs in
v=spf1 without breaking compatibility, but if we can, a 4408bis might be
appropriate.
I still think that work on SPFv3 should soon be begun in parallel to that.
We're however always free to use the wannabe-framework for what the name
says, and add modifiers for useful features. Without interested SPF
implementors and receivers (wishful thinking of senders doesn't count)
that's futile.
Well, everyone was using IP-based SMTP transport of e-mail before SPFv1
came out, so the reservoir of potential SPFv1 users was huge. This is
obviously different for features like DKIM and S/MIME/PGP support. That
doesn't mean that we shouldn't offer those features, though. Besides,
there are other important flaws of SPFv1 that need to be fixed (breaking
backwards compatibility) sooner or later, such as the lack of a "default
SPF record" (replacement for the zone-cut search).
We can do it by releasing info about how to deal with particular
special case flow in tech document on SPF website.
"We" can as well submit an I-D, that's even easier from my POV.
Before anything can be published, it needs to be written by someone.
Anyone is free to start writing such drafts. As soon as a draft has been
written, it usually attracts critics with whose support it can then be
improved.
An "how to use v=spf1 only for HELO" I-D might be useful, some folks
apparently don't like the "for each MAIL FROM" part of SPF (and anything
that's only relevant for MAIL FROM).
Would you be willing to draft such a document?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFFESZuwL7PKlBZWjsRAlOTAKD+V+1bveRXhGOvIGwlUGU+t/N/nACdEN+H
gub48aS5Px198HCy4OBW22I=
=uilb
-----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