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

Re: DEPLOY: Rejection of Sender ID does not result in standardiza tion of SPF Classic

To: IETF MARID WG <ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: DEPLOY: Rejection of Sender ID does not result in standardiza tion of SPF Classic
From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 09:17:17 +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

Hallam-Baker, Phillip writes:

Are you saying that NNTP is a good example of protocol design? Or a good example of creating a widely supported feature set?

It's an example of a protocol that's evolved outside anyone's control. In my impression, it's evolved without accompanying documentation. Very inconvenient for implementers.

Arnt

References:
- RE: DEPLOY: Rejection of Sender ID does not result in standardiza tion of SPF Classic
  - From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip

Prev by Date: Re: consensus call on MUST/SHOULD language for TXT records
Next by Date: Re: DEPLOY: Sender-ID provides little or no defence against adaptive threats
Previous by thread: RE: DEPLOY: Rejection of Sender ID does not result in standardiza tion of SPF Classic
Next by thread: Re: DEPLOY: Rejection of Sender ID does not result in standardiza tion of SPF Classic
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread