RE: Microsoft submitting Caller ID as draft RFC

["Harry Katz" <hkatz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sauer, Damon
> Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 1:18 PM
> To: Hadmut Danisch; ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: Microsoft submitting Caller ID as draft RFC
> 
> 
> And he mentions Hadmut by name :-) congrats Hadmut!

Aber naturlich!

> 
> The caller ID also requires that you create a separate DNS 
> record for your domain. SPF doesn't.
> _ep.<domain> (I assume that the prefix _ep means 'email 
> policy' - could mean extra pork.. Who knows.
>
 
We deliberately added this prefix to separate Caller ID TXT records from
any other TXT records a domain chooses to publish.

> 
> Here is Microsoft's caller-ID record.
> 
> _ep.microsoft.com       text = "<ep xmlns='http://ms.net/1'
> testing='true'><out><m>"
> "<mx/><a>213.199.128.160</a><a>213.199.128.145</a><a>207.46.71
> .29</a><a>
> 194.121.59.20</a><a>157.60.216.10</a><a>131.107.3.116</a><a>13
> 1.107.3.11
> 7</a><a>131.107.3.100</a>" "</m></out></ep>"
> 
> EVERY _ep record will have the "<ep xmlns='http://ms.net/"; in it.
> (hmmm... Every DNS record for every company will have the 
> MS.net link in it. Apple will choke!) Just the server IPs 
> between the <a></a> tags will change. (Testing =True and the 
> /1 mean something too. You will have to read the spec.
> 

OK, let's relax here.  We fully understand that the ms.net namespace is
not going to be the final name used, especially if this becomes adopted
by the IETF.  We chose something short and something that won't be in
conflict with anyone else's name.  We're perfectly open to changing this
to a commonly agreed upon namespace.  MARID.net for example appears to
be available.  Marshall, Andy, you might want to grab this one!  :-)

> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Damon Sauer
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hadmut Danisch [mailto:hadmut@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 3:59 PM
> To: ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Microsoft submitting Caller ID as draft RFC
> 
> 
> 
> 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/feb04/02-24RSAAn
> tiSpamTech
> VisionPR.asp
> 
> 
> Hadmut
> 
> 
> *****
> "The information transmitted is intended only for the person 
> or entity to which it is addressed and may contain 
> confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged material.  Any 
> review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or 
> taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by 
> persons or entities other than the intended recipient is 
> prohibited.  If you received this in error, please contact 
> the sender and delete the material from all computers."  113
> 
> 
>