spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Is it RFC yet?

2003-12-15 14:18:22

Sure, there are some companies that won't add support unless 
it becomes an 
RFC.  But those are the companies that aren't going to be 
able to sell 
their software -- not because it doesn't support SPF, but 
because they will 
always be far behind in their anti-spam technology.

What I am trying to get across here is that there are almost no companies,
certainly only one of any size that is likely to make existence of an RFC an
issue unless this group makes the mistake of doing so.

The issues for application vendors are stability and interoperability. We do
not like trying to hit a moving target. Start an IETF working group and the
target will be moving for a very long time, far longer than we are prepared
to wait.

The other issue that would delay certainty is adding complex and unnecessary
features. Eric is right, you need to jettison the macro capability and
anything else that is not absolutely essential, particularly if it is tricky
to specify.


If you must submit the draft, submit as an experimental RFC. The IESG might
object (rightly) that this is an end run arround them and kick the draft
out. But the scope for pointless ammendment and filibustering would be
eliminated.

                Phill

-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.9.4.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your 
subscription, 
please go to 
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>