wayne wrote:
While I agree that MarkL worked hard and tried to do what he
thought was best, I disagree that what was created was widely
accepted as an "SPF classic" draft.
It was _here_ (I'm not saying that anybody implemented it), it
was a fast shot for almost the same $reason why there now is a
new -01 soon to be replaced by a -02. E.g. Stephane asking for
a new SPF RR based on no I-D at all won't work.
It wasn't *just* me who had problems with it.
Sure, the "FAIL malformed domain" was a profoundly bad idea -
to be fixed in whatever came next.
I also disagree that we couldn't have had a much more
compatible draft submitted to the IETF within the timeframe
that the lentczner draft was submitted.
You were absent when MarkL started. You came back with a ton
of objections when it was almost ready (for its purpose as
fast shot). And while I agreed with all principles in your
"unofficial manual" the same was not immediately true for say
James. Some details like the 3 * 10 limit needed discussion.
Feb 11 draft-mengwong-spf-00 sent to the IETF
May 16 draft-mengwong-spf-01 sent to the IETF
Sep 15 draft-ietf-marid-mailfrom-00
Sep 15 draft-ietf-marid-protocol-03
Whatever you thought, I considered that as MARID finally
starting to see the light. Unfortunately not for long...
Sep 22 MARID: appeal
Oct 13 draft-lentczner-spf-00 sent to IETF
Oct 14 draft-leibzon-responsible-submitter-00.txt
Oct 15 first release of draft-schlitt-spf-00pre1
Oct 16 release of draft-schlitt-spf-00pre2
Nov 3 release of draft-schlitt-spf-00pre4
All claiming to be "libspf2 manuals not intended to be sent
to the IETF", yes. As relevant as say the "op=" SPF draft.
Nov 11 SID drafts published via the IETF
Nov 15 release of draft-schlitt-spf-00
No I-D at this moment. Some individuals claiming to be part
of an obscure "SPF community" like it. Relevance for the
IESG (incl. Ted) from their POV: zero.
Dec 22 draft-schlitt-* drafts are official
http://spf.mehnle.net/Council_Resolution/17
Read: Now this obscure (outside POV) SPF community appears
to have some formal body acting as speaker, and internally
they apparently prepare to replace draft-lentczner. But I
very much doubt that the world at large (incl. IETF / IESG)
has an idea what draft-schlitt-spf-00 might be.
the mengwong-spf-0[01] drafts were the official drafts for
5-8 months and the status wasn't controversial.
The mengwong draft was clinically dead after the first bug
in the ABNF was detected. Latest since Sep 15 from my POV:
| This Internet-Draft will expire in September 2004.
lentczner-00 was official for at most two months
Not for the IETF / IESG, draft-lentczner -00 was the only
classic I-D for three months, that's a quarter of the year.
the SPF community has always been somewhat seperate from
the IETF.
Not from my POV, since Meng's "CYA" I always wanted an RfC
clearly stating the facts. Not some obscure texts free to
be twisted into whatever MS or Meng like next. And I still
trust that the IETF won't take any shit.
There was no such thing as an SPF Council for two critical
months, there was only John Glube trying his best, and a
"private list", where Meng played delaying games.
Technical stuff snipped, I've submitted it as new [Discuss]
"for SPF Council review".
Bye, Frank