Wayne wrote:
In hind sight, I think I should have voted 'no'. I don't think we
gained much by the appeal, and we have lost a lot of time.
When the first appeal occured, I was in favor of it. I think the word
"hindsight" captures exactly my current reservations for going down the
same path again. It was not wrong for us to try. But looking back, with
the knowledge we have now, I find it rather unrealistic to expect a
different result, this time. It was made abundantly clear that we should
not expect the IETF to "slap" Microsoft like that, as wayne put it. And I
agree with that assessment. It ain't gonna happen.
I do not consider the first round to have been a waste of time, though;
for, if for nothing else, we got some good insight in what to expect from
the IETF. But now that we know, I ask myself: has anything changed? And I
do not think so. So, I think one of the early questions the new Council
will be facing, is asking itself: is it realistic for us to expect a
different outcome, this time around? I think not. Fortunately, the Council
is just a body representing the (rough) community consensus; so,
ultimately, this group at large will have to decide whether they think the
Council should push for an IAB appeal.
So, I, for one, know I will be looking forward to hearing people explain
why they feel a new appeal will succeed this time. For, while I do not
look upon the first appeal as a waste of time, I think that, without
'material' changes in the field, expecting a different outcome, just for
the sake of it, probably will be a waste of time.
- Mark
System Administrator Asarian-host.org
---
"If you were supposed to understand it,
we wouldn't call it code." - FedEx
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com