Philip Hazel <ph10@???> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Richard Welty wrote:
>
>> unless M$ backs down, i am under the impression that sender id ain't
>> going into sendmail. if it doesn't go into sendmail, i can't see
>> sender id ever reaching critical mass.
>
> Good for Sendmail! (Now who'd have thought I would ever write that?)
Sam has said the same about Courier :
On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 08:01:16PM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>
> The purpose of this message is to clarify my plans for any deployment of
> the Sender-ID specification in Courier (http://www.courier-mta.org).
>
> Microsoft has made certain patent claims on the Sender-ID specification.
> Microsoft has issued the IPR disclosures and royalty free license required
> by the IETF. It appears that IETF's contemporary policies do not prevent
> the sponsor/advocates from including patented IP material into
> standards-track specifications, without even requiring the sponsor to
> actually enumerate and identify their intellectual property; a mere claim
> of the existence of some nebulous IP rights is sufficient, which can be
> revealed at any point in the future, at the sponsor's discretion.
>
> The current development version of Courier implements the original
> SPF-classic specification, that predates Sender-ID. This will be rolled
> into a forthcoming release. I'm quite pleased with the results so far --
> there are a lot of classic SPF records in existence, as witnessed by my
> mail logs
>
> It will not be possible for me to implement Sender ID in Courier. Courier
> is licensed under the GPL. The FSF already flatly stated that Microsoft's
> IP license is not GPL compatible. I reviewed the most recent version of
> Microsoft's proposed IP license, and I've reached the same conclusion. For
> this reason Sender ID cannot be implemented in Courier; Courier's
> implementation will be limited to the unencumbered SPF-classic.
>
> --
> Sam Varshavchik
> http://www.courier-mta.org
>
Philip, it would be helpful if you would make a similar statement on the
MARID list (as long as you concur with the sentiment, which it seems you
do - apart from the SPF part). The 'last call' is currently coming to a
close.
Peter
