Chris Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Of course, it'll be just in time for the release of this new thing that > the SPF guys and microsoft are planning. And as far as I know, it won't > be backwards compatible with SPF,
Eduardo Roldan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The article talks about compatibility between SPF and SenderID. In > resume it says that SPF dns records are compatible with SenderID. So now > we can deploy SPF without fear of remake all again. Exactly. The merged "Sender ID" proposal is supposed to be compatible with SPF. /Microsoft/ only went for the merger because they wanted their proposal to benefit from the considerable number of SPF records that have already been (and are still being) published. /Meng Weng Wong/ (the SPF project leader) only went for the merger because he wanted Microsoft's PR and market power to back the SPF record syntax. So essentially domain owners can keep publishing using the SPF syntax regardless whether SPF or Sender ID will win over the other at the end of the day. > and as much as we may dislike it, no microsoft endorsement means SPF as > it stands now won't compete against the new protocol (esp. since the SPF > people will be supporting this newer protocol). No, you are misjudging the position of Microsoft and Sender ID within the MTA Authorization Records in DNS (MARID, the IETF term) market, and especially in the IETF MARID working group, which in the end will probably be one (if not *the*) most relevant authority over which proposal gets the IETF's blessing. And Microsoft's weird "XML in DNS" stuff certainly doesn't have a majority in that working group. If you're interested, here's the MARID charter, including the wg's mailing list info and the mailing list archive: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/marid-charter.html Chris Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > PHP, etc. only give you a "from" field, and the language then parses > that out as the envelope sender. The only solution would be to hand- > code all of your SMTP connections, and when it's a choice between that > and using a single-fire function called mail(), 99% of web coders are > going to opt for the easier solution. Maybe users of those broken libraries should go and file some bug reports. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com _______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
