Dotzero wrote: > Writing a standard which subverts the intent of individuals > publishing to a different and existing standard is simply > unethical and wrong. +1 > What happened was essentially a political move because people > chose not to publish SPF2 records for PRA. So, the response > was to force people to opt-out (publish an essentially > meaningless SPF2 record) because the SID camp was losing in > the real world marketplace. +1 > One argument that was put forth after the announcement that > SID would apply PRA to SPF1 records was that it was a > conspiracy to get publishers to yank their SPF1 records. Yes, when I said "excessive technical incompotence or outright corruption" it wasn't the polite way to put it, but it was and still is how I feel about it. > People and organizations chose to publish a record according > to a standard because they have a reasonable expectation on > how that record will be used. While there may be edge cases > of abuse, the expectation is that most people will respect > the standard. That's why it's called a standard. +1 > "Your honor, I have this alternative means of interpreting > what a red stoplight indicates.....go go go as fast as you > can". LOL, precisely. Full ACK on all your points, bye, Frank _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf