Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Mon, 19 August 2013 21:47 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CAA611E816F for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:47:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.582
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.582 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.017, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 YKG4IAhBszjh for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:47:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 961A311E814B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:47:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.66] (76-218-9-215.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.9.215]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r7JLlbZ2009556 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:47:41 -0700
Message-ID: <52129262.7070803@dcrocker.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:47:14 -0700
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
Subject: Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
References: <20130819131916.22579.36328.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <20130819150521.GB21088@besserwisser.org> <20130819200802.GI19481@mx1.yitter.info> <521284A4.4050901@qti.qualcomm.com> <5212862F.3080507@qti.qualcomm.com> <5212873B.1010007@dcrocker.net> <CAL0qLwaPJSEXbEadyxcExDSbHg7RMDZ-YzfLztkHkvNF6WOOAQ@mail.gmail.com> <20130819214139.GB19946@mx1.yitter.info>
In-Reply-To: <20130819214139.GB19946@mx1.yitter.info>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.66]); Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:47:41 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 21:47:50 -0000

On 8/19/2013 2:41 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>    So I think it _is_ fair to
> say that adoption of features in core infrastructure takes a very long
> time, and if one wants to add such features one has to be prepared to
> wait.

As long as the generic topic is being commented on...

The difference between a "slow" adoption rate and an adoption rate of 
essentially zero is fundamental.    So yes, a pure single number of 
years can be misleading and needs some sense of whether the is any 
progress at all.

There also needs to be some care about marking the start of the clock, 
given that some technologies have multiple components needed before they 
are worth adopting, and an initial, incomplete set might be published 
before a sufficient set is available.


d/


-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net