On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 07:46:48PM -0500,
wayne <wayne(_at_)schlitt(_dot_)net> wrote
a message of 170 lines which said:
Finally, in light of the fact that SPF has been widely deployed for
over a year by at least a dozen implementations, by tens of
thousands of users, that the SPF-classic draft is intended to
document this current usage, and that features that have not been
widely used, or not used at all, have been removed, I do not think
that Experimental status is appropriate for this draft.
I agree.
As such, I would like to ask that the IESG consider this I-D for
Proposed Standard status. I
You switch from one extreme to the other. Why not Informational
status?