SenderID != SPF (Was: Status of MARID WG?)

In <[email protected]> Dean Anderson <[email protected]> writes:

> [...]                                                 The SPF idea is not
> the last "ultimate spam solution", that will be found to have not quite
> considered everything, or even considered enough to be more useful than
> harmful.  It was a good try, and the authors should be credited. However,
> reasonable people recognize when it's time to go back to the drawing
> board. I think the SPF authors and propoenents need to get to work again
> instead of complaining about the lack of ratification of their flawed
> proposals.

This working group never advanced SPF as a proposal.  It was involved
in the creation of SenderID, which has many technical and licensing
problems, but SenderID was never SPF.

SPF is progressing just fine, both publication of SPF records and SPF
checking are up sharply in the last month or so.  (This upsurge
occured before Microsoft and Meng published their new SenderID
proposal, so they have nothing to do with it.)  SPF has never been
considered by the SPF community as being an "ultimate spam solution",
and people who imply that it is generally are doing so to set up a
strawman argument.


-wayne