In
<4FD2C985D5E2A642AE25823DFD61C2B002FAE655(_at_)orca(_dot_)agcom(_dot_)amgreetings(_dot_)com>
"MW Mike Weiner (5028)" <MWeiner(_at_)ag(_dot_)com> writes:
I just wanted to personally acknowledge and thank you for your forward
efforts in this regard.
You are most welcome!
I believe your submission is actually closer to
the spf-draft-200406 than MarkL's is currently [...]
I strongly agree with this and that was my intentions.
[...] and more what I would
like to see the current spf draft look like. I am unsure however why you
have chosen the path NOT to submit to IETF, but that's your personal
choice.
Anyone who has followed my posts knows that I'm not afraid of going
into battles, but I like to choose which ones I think are worthwhile.
Submitting my libspf2 doc to the IETF would cause conflicts about who
really "speaks" for SPF-classic. I think both implementors and
publishers will pull back because of the conflict. I suspect that the
IETF would listen to Meng and MarkL because they have been on all
previous drafts and I would end up losing anyway.
If Meng and MarkL want to see my draft submitted instead of theirs,
they are free to do so. That is one of the nice things about the
copyrights on the drafts, they don't need my permission to submit it.
At this instant, Meng and MarkL are not interested in adopting any or
all of my changes. Neither has ruled it out, and things may change in
the future (after IETF-61?), but I recommend not holding your breath.
-wayne