IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] FW: I-D Action: draft-kucherawy-authres-spf-erratum-00.txt

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com> Wed, 04 January 2012 03:33 UTC

Return-Path: <msk@cloudmark.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08F1F21F84D5 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 19:33:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.52
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.079, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A50ke5VJEdYj for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 19:33:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A143421F84D4 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 19:33:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from malice.corp.cloudmark.com (172.22.10.71) by EXCH-HTCAS901.corp.cloudmark.com (172.22.10.73) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.355.2; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 19:33:38 -0800
Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by malice.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.10.71]) with mapi; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 19:33:43 -0800
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com>
To: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2012 19:33:42 -0800
Thread-Topic: [apps-discuss] FW: I-D Action: draft-kucherawy-authres-spf-erratum-00.txt
Thread-Index: AczKeMqQVeY0jKzOSIC8yr9bXpkdKQAGKv2g
Message-ID: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C156EC@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com>
References: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C156DF@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20120103145134.099ad970@resistor.net> <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C156E3@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20120103161311.08dfa958@resistor.net>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20120103161311.08dfa958@resistor.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] FW: I-D Action: draft-kucherawy-authres-spf-erratum-00.txt
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 03:33:45 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of SM
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2012 4:23 PM
> To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] FW: I-D Action: draft-kucherawy-authres-spf-erratum-00.txt
> 
> Could the update wait until 4408bis is done?

Yes, that's one option.  But why wait?  4408bis is not likely to change the name of "fail" as it would seriously impact backward compatibility, something its charter says they will be avoiding.

-MSK

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email