[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Microsoft submitting Caller ID as draft RFC

To: ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Microsoft submitting Caller ID as draft RFC
From: Hadmut Danisch <hadmut@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 21:59:09 +0200
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/mail-archive/>
List-id: <ietf-mxcomp.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-mxcomp-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
References: <> <>
Sender: owner-ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i

On Fri, Apr 09, 2004 at 10:54:47AM -0600, Doug Royer wrote:
> 
> It seem to me to be SPF except in XML. What are the advantages
> of Caller-ID over SPF?


Caller-ID is the latest of the "visions" of Bill Gates.



http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2004/feb04/02-24RSAAntiSpamTechVisionPR.asp


Hadmut

References:
- Microsoft submitting Caller ID as draft RFC
  - From: Harry Katz
- Re: Microsoft submitting Caller ID as draft RFC
  - From: Doug Royer

Prev by Date: Caller ID and bounce messages (was: Microsoft submitting Caller ID as draft RFC)
Next by Date: RE: Microsoft submitting Caller ID as draft RFC
Previous by thread: Re: Microsoft submitting Caller ID as draft RFC
Next by thread: RE: Microsoft submitting Caller ID as draft RFC
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread