In <20050523161324(_dot_)GL35019(_at_)Space(_dot_)Net> Markus Stumpf
<maex-lists-email-ietf-smtp(_at_)Space(_dot_)Net> writes:
On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 10:19:23AM -0500, wayne wrote:
The IESG intent at the closing of MARID was that the various drafts
be submitted by individuals for "Experimental" status.
That is fine and dandy, but irrelevant for SPF. SPF was never adopted
by the MARID WG and was never a MARID I-D. That the authors of the
MARID drafts chose not to submit draft-ietf-marid-protocol-* is
mostly their problem.
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.asrg.smtpverify
[...]
We are planning on submitting the proposals as experimental RFCs and the
LMAP discussion document as informational RFC. The following proposals
will be submitted:
[...]
This was confirmed by the IESG (can't find the meeting minutes right now).
Indeed, that is what I remember also. They were supposed to be
submitted early on, but to the best of my knowledge, this never
happened. I don't know why.
Anyway, maybe you feel differently about your I-D, but I don't either
your MTAMark proposal nor SPF was ever adopted by MARID. There never
was a draft-ietf-marid-* draft on them. They weren't consider for
Proposed Standard status, like the MARID I-Ds were intended for.
draft-schlitt-spf-classic-* is really an update of
draft-mengwong-spf-*. I would hope that the IETF would not block you
from updating your proposal either.
-wayne