On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, Hector Santos wrote:
From: "Hector Santos" <spf-discuss(_at_)winserver(_dot_)com>
William,
First, I think this "timeline" is too short. Why the rush?
Original IESG decision was on December 8, 2005 and so we're running out
of time to file an appeal. Its supposed to be done done within 2 months
of original decision (section 6.5.4 of RFC 2026) and that means last day
to do it is either tuesday or wednesday (depending on if you view same
day of the month two months after as being within timeframe or not...
I suspect appeal on wednesday would still be accepted though)
Also note,
not everyone is on a daily schedule here. Atleast provide a week's
time, Friday, 5:00?
Second, for the layman, summarize what the key issues and concerns are
in the most simplistic manner possible and why an appeal is important,
I did. Perhaps it should have been shorter...
Third, if you have current operational evidence of harm and/or damage
caused by whatever the claim is, it would help to document and
highlight it as evidence for the appeal.
We can't or at least we should not for purpose of appeal. Appeal is on
the decision to publish document as RFC which is supposed to be when
experiment would start according to IETF. IETF would request operational
evidence 2 years from that time to decide if experiment worked or not.
And because of deadlines, we do not have enough time to gather operational
evidence anyway...
Follow up:
Related to #3, convince me why I should vote yes for an appeal, by
showing me how MS actions or "Sender ID Experiment" will harm me normal
SPF v1.0 or SPF classic implementations, including those with or with no
plans to support Sender ID?
I believe SPF Council asked for clarification from community so as to
determine the consensus. So its not me but somebody else who needs to
try to convince you.
I don't support SenderID nor do we have any plans to do so? Is there
going to be a harm to my product line operations and/or customers?
I believe it was stated that the harm can come if SID failures are
seen as failures of SPF. The confusion can also cause additional
support requests from your customers.
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com