Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID

On Wed, 2005-06-15 at 10:41 +0200, Frank Ellermann wrote:
> Pete Chown wrote in spf-help:
> 
> > What should I do now?  Is there a way of supporting SPF
> > without helping to get a patented technology established
> > on the Internet?
> 
> Sure.
> 
> MS pretends to control spf2.0/pra to a certain degree, as
> defined in draft-lyon-senderid-pra-01
> 
> They certainly don't control all of spf2.0, as defined in
> draft-lyon-senderid-core-01
> 
> They never controlled a single bit of v=spf1 as defined
> in draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01
> 
> As long as you don't want PRA this doesn't affect you,
> v=spf1 is an open standard (wannabe from the IETF's POV,
> there's yet no RfC for it).
> 
> MS tried to pull the stunt that v=spf1 is by default a
> part of PRA.  This is a lie, the IESG knows that it's a
> lie, so senderid-lyon-core-01 can never pass as an RfC.
> 
>                  Bye, Frank (Cc: mxcomp)

This advice is based upon a false impression that Microsoft waits for an
RFC before producing product.  Recall draft-leach-cifs-v1-spec-02.txt?
Consider spf2.0/mfrom and _removing_ v=spf1 as the safe reaction to
Sender-ID.

-Doug