-----Original Message-----
From: owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
[mailto:owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com]On Behalf Of Meng
Weng Wong
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 2:43 PM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: [spf-discuss] everybody please calm down :)
snip
Therefore, any discussion of forking, etc, is premature, and
frankly looks a bit paranoid. It would be more constructive
to help the merged spec develop in the direction you want it
to go, than to try to oppose it on the basis of any real or
imagined shortcomings.
Looking in as a mostly innocent bystander (I hope to use (and am using) SPF,
not write code for it) I think that perhaps people would be more likely to
calm down if SPFv1 was still headed for the IETF. What I hear people saying
is that SPFv1 allows processing before data in a lightweight protocol and I
don't want to lose that.
I believe that the New SPF is focused after data (2822) with before data
(2821) deferred until later. If the old (SPFv1) SPF could be adopted as the
basis for an RFC for 2821 time in parallel with the New SPF being adopted
for 2822 time, then I think people would be happy. It would also help sell
SPF in the mean time. Right now, it just feels like an orphan.
Scott