----- Original Message -----
From: "Meng Weng Wong" <mengwong(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com>
I have proposed to the IETF AD and co-chairs that we publish
an Experimental RFC to document SPF Classic,
Excellent news :-)
and also
publish Experimental RFCs for Sender ID to make Microsoft
happy,
By doing this you give M$ the same advantage of "first-there" as SPF
classic.
You're either playing politics or you're in league with M$ - which is it?
Please don't read that question as abrasive, I agree with John Glube when he
says that all individuals are free to act as they wish, but there are a
*lot* of people on this list who want nothing to do with M$'s work.
and also publish Experiemental RFCs that head in the
direction of Unified SPF.
Don't let this hold up the publication of SPF-classic, that is the one that
gives this community a head start.
How do people feel about this course of action?
You are free to do what you want, because you are the one of the three
parties invited to submit such documentation.
Mark has said that he is a "shepherd" and that is a very comforting attitude
from us sheep's point of view ;-) , and Meng is baffled by us needing
permission to do things, which is probably because he doesn't realise just
how much of a leader he is seen as by M$, IESG, the press, etc, etc.
I am *very* grateful to Mark and Meng for their sterling work thus far, but
it is probably appropriate to move forward with a more formal working group.
I suggest that a larger body is formed with a slightly more formal
"constitution" for the developement of SPF, so that the invitation to
publish RFC's, the representation of the SPF community, and other aspects of
this work can be handled in a more democratic manner.
Slainte,
JohnP.
johnp(_at_)idimo(_dot_)com
ICQ 313355492