On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, Scott Kitterman wrote:
I maybe remembering wrong, but I thought we changed the TERM to 2 years.
I don't think so, but we don't seem to be missing much by not having had an
election. My view is we should not expend effort fixing something that's
not broken.
I agree, but there are two issues that need addressing:
1) SPFv3 (low priority)
2) An official evaluation of experience with the "experimental" RFC.
Neither really requires a council at this point, however.
That is probably true. I think number 2 needs to happen soon so we can
get SPFv1 to be a true RFC. I would like to seem number 1 happen soon but
I agree it is a low priority.
--
Boyd Gerber <gerberb(_at_)zenez(_dot_)com>
ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047
-------------------------------------------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org
Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com