On 9/13/2004 8:46 PM, wayne sent forth electrons to convey:
I think continuing with the PRA is a very poor use of this working
group's time.
I agree with the majority. If a small minority (the Chairs) wish to
continue to claim that is not what the WG is doing, I won't try to stop
them. But the WG is not interested in PRA, for reasons well expressed
by, e.g. William Leibzon in this thread. And that's what DOES matter,
because this is the IETF, and that's how things work here. It would be
nice if the several clear requests of the Chairs to eliminate
IPR-encumbered solutions from the running not be given short shrift, but
then elimination of the encumberances would be nice too. Instead,
document authors need to produce new drafts intended to meet the
chartered work items, and a consensus call on them is needed*.
Marid-mpr is such an item. They will find rough consensus if they are
well written and well defended, because, again, this is the IETF. If
you try to ram junk through, you induce posts like this.
*Contrast this sentence with the fait-accompli tone of "The document
authors have agreed to producing new drafts intended to meet the
chartered work item, and a consensus call on them or the appropriate
diffs will be forthcoming." I had written "*new* document authors ..."
but Meng just posted again about HELO, so there's hope...
=-=-=-=-=
More media coverage of MARID - FYI:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/09/13/ietf_bounces_sender_id/
BTW, if anyone is following nanae or nanabl and has noticed interesting
threads discussing our work here, I'd be interested in links. Some of
the battle-hardened know rather well what tricks spammers [might] use.
Kinda answered my own question - found some months old posts:
I found support from Bill Cole: (who posts here too, seems to be letting
folks there know of milestones reached - thanks.)
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&threadm=bill-55E121.16123407082004%40fireproof.scconsult.com&rnum=3&prev=/groups%3Fnum%3D20%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26safe%3Doff%26scoring%3Dd%26q%3Dmarid%2Babuse%26btnG%3DSearch
Anton Squeegee: <sic>
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&threadm=bill-55E121.16123407082004%40fireproof.scconsult.com&rnum=3&prev=/groups%3Fnum%3D20%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26safe%3Doff%26scoring%3Dd%26q%3Dmarid%2Babuse%26btnG%3DSearch
Vernon Schryver: tough criticism, but answerable with something that's
easy enough to implement that it can become mandatory in a reasonable
time period:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&threadm=bill-6C26C6.21474829072004%40fireproof.scconsult.com&rnum=4&prev=/groups%3Fnum%3D20%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26safe%3Doff%26scoring%3Dd%26q%3Dmarid%2Babuse%26btnG%3DSearch