Re: [spfbis] Proposed spf TXT record change

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 10 February 2016 15:06 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE1821B2BB9 for <spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 07:06:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.664
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.664 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, KHOP_DYNAMIC=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OTf-Q1trGBGT for <spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 07:06:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E64A61A902D for <spfbis@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 07:06:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 67101 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2016 15:06:21 -0000
Received: from unknown (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 10 Feb 2016 15:06:21 -0000
Date: 10 Feb 2016 15:05:59 -0000
Message-ID: <20160210150559.963.qmail@ary.lan>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: spfbis@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <56BAB8C1.50809@ragged-software.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spfbis/pNWz-wJIrLq6SvJk0biOjBRpiWU>
Cc: rag@ragged-software.com
Subject: Re: [spfbis] Proposed spf TXT record change
X-BeenThere: spfbis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: SPFbis discussion list <spfbis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spfbis>, <mailto:spfbis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spfbis/>
List-Post: <mailto:spfbis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spfbis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spfbis>, <mailto:spfbis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:06:29 -0000

In article <56BAB8C1.50809@ragged-software.com>; you write:
>While I'm aware that there are "tens of thousands of mail systems all
>over the world", there are only a few SMTP implementations that are run
>on all those systems. You only have to get the SMTP developers on board.

Well, OK.  Why don't you start contacting them, encourange them to
change their SPF implementations with a suitable transition period,
and let us know when we can throw the switch.

One immutable rule of the standards and open source world is that
telling other people to do work that you're not willing to do yourself
is, ah, ineffective at best.

R's,
John