Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IETF's MARID Is Dead

Posted by timothy on from the that's-a-shame dept.

Daniel Goldman writes "According to this post, from Ted Hardie Co-Area Director for Applications, the IETF will be closing the MARID Working Group. This working group planned to develop a DNS-based mechanism for storing and distributing information associated with MTA authorization to prevent spam. It was chartered after extensive discussion of the issues in the IRTF's Anti-spam Research Group."

3 of 11 comments (clear)

  1. Nice summary...NOT by jhoffoss · · Score: 5, Informative
    So what the aformentioned post states:

    The group is divided on technical issues (meaning bickering about this or that, I assume) related to how the TXT record should be formatted and chacked by MTAs.

    The group is also sick of the IP bickering between Apache/Debian, et. al. and MS, et. al., rather than purely engineering tasks.

    In the end, the group will make no headway, because no one will concede or compromise on the technical aspects of MARID's goal. Microsoft's IP claims only seem to be a final blow.

    Instead of the group coming up with a [proposed] standard, they are asking each individual entity to put forth their document as an RFC.

    So it seems MS, SPF, etc. will each put forth their version of the standard, and may the best RFC win.

    Next time you submit a story, how about you actually include something about it in the description?

    --
    Linux: The world's best text-adventure game.
    1. Re:Nice summary...NOT by fnord123 · · Score: 2, Informative
      Actually they are not being "put forth [as] standard". The experimental drafts track (which is where the ADs and chairs just consigned the various proposals) is most definitely not the standards track.

      All the various proposals are now considered (by the IETF) as experiments. They are being documented as experimental RFCs and the various authors have been told to go off and try them out and prove they work.

      Maybe in a year or two the IETF will look and say, "ok, it is clear that solution X is working and the interested parties are willing to compromise on something instead of being such jerks about it" - at that point the IETF might recharter the WG and move one of the drafts to the standards track (but don't hold your breath).

  2. Re:what a shame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    For those with acronym overload, that's SPF (Sender Policy Framework) + SRS (Sender Rewriting Scheme).