* Martin Schulze: > According to a Reuters story, Microsoft's Sender-ID standard has been > revised and will be resubmitted to the IETF. > > I wonder what people are thinking about this revision. > Do we have a common stance on it?
Which revision? The only thing that's been updated so far is the FAQ (on October 25). It reads: | Q9: Why is a signed license required? | | A: The fact that the one must sign the license to be licensed is a | good way to ensure that licensees know the terms under which the | patented technology is being licensed and ensures that Microsoft | receives a reciprocal license from each licensee. <http://download.microsoft.com/download/4/3/9/439b024b-09fd-44ee-8ff0-10e834004c36/senderid_FAQ.PDF> This doesn't look very promising. Other parts of the FAQ suggest that mail server operators must sign a license, too. We haven't got any evidence of a substantial change so far, and a discussion appears to be premature.
