In
<Pine(_dot_)LNX(_dot_)4(_dot_)44(_dot_)0410011124300(_dot_)684-100000(_at_)sokol(_dot_)elan(_dot_)net>
"william(at)elan.net" <william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net> writes:
On Fri, 1 Oct 2004, wayne wrote:
In <e941453904100109286e4ed3ac(_at_)mail(_dot_)gmail(_dot_)com> "Anne P.
Mitchell, Esq. <amitchell(_at_)isipp(_dot_)com>"
<shedevil(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> writes:
Is there any reason that it can't be ready for submission at the end
of next week?
You mean besides the fact that both draft authors have explicitly said
that they do not want to standardize SPFv1?
It does not matter if they want it, the editor's job is to recognize the
consensus and move forward with it. And I've never seen such a clear
consensus on MARID on in fact on most other WGs I'm on.
You don't seem to understand the obvious. This is *exactly* why the
working group was shut down and and "individual" I-D submissions are
going forward.
With the MARID being disbanded, this lets Meng, the IETF (Ted and the
maybe former co-chairs?) and MS (Harry, Jim, et al) avoid having to
deal with working group directions and working group last calls. Now,
they are free to do what they want and the only road block between
SenderID with the PRA and RFC status is the IESG last call.
Moving forward with drafts for SPFv1 will piss Microsoft off. Meng
and Craig Spiezle of Microsoft are going to be discussing SPFv2 at the
next ISPCon next month. Both Meng and folks from MS have stated that
"we" are working together and moving forward with SenderID, including
the PRA.
What is wrong with some people? Can't they recognize a snake or are they
waiting for it to bite them in the a** ?
I suspect that Meng would say that there is nothing wrong and that MS
support is too valuable to throw away.
And Meng should realize that if he wants support of SPF community he should
act as representative of it and not in opposition to majority opinion.
This hasn't happened yet. I have misjudged the reaction to moving
forward with the PRA by the SPF community. I was expecting something
other than the reaction I received to the following two posts:
http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com/200409/0785.html
http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com/200409/0846.html
-wayne