On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 07:51:48PM +0000, Mark wrote:
| 
| Also, I am beginning to get worried. Over the last few days, one person
| after the other seems to pop out with yet another brilliant idea to redesign
| major parts of SPF from scratch. We should be focussing on getting SPF
| adopted, and writing support tools for it, instead of starting each fresh
| day with a new round of re-negotiating that which we already agreed upon
| earlier.
| 

Most of those people are actually me, and I'm just transmitting an
alternative design philosophy from a Major Player Who Shall Not Be Named.

I believe that it is important to take opposing ideas for a test drive
before discarding them.  Most of the time you come away firmer in your
beliefs.  Sometimes you change your mind for the better.  Either way you
win.

Ultimately I think it comes down to different cultures.  XML in DNS is
not acceptable to the culture that reads Slashdot, runs Linux, and
discusses standards openly on mailing lists.  XML in DNS is a brilliant
idea in the culture that controls the market for MUAs on the desktop and
redefines the technology landscape on a regular basis.

The question is, who's got more clout?

-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.9.4.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, 
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname <at> ©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµøˆ¡