Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
Doug Otis wrote:
[SPF/Sender ID debate omitted]
The draft points out in its Security Considerations (section 7.7) that issues
which may exist in the message evaluation methods it covers apply here as
well, and admonishes implementors to be aware of them. The context of
this draft is not the place to re-open those old debates.
That this draft names SPF and Sender-ID as current methods does not
endorse or promote them.
Murray,
While I think no response was necessary, since Doug's note continues to utter
the same concerns he always has, if you really felt compelled to respond, I wish
you note had ended here.
There is no benefit in responding to material that is outside the scope of this
effort, is not new and has no support.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf