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

[Pete Resnick <[e-mail]>]

I probably should have sent out this message over the weekend, but I was 
hoping I would complete a bigger message soon. Since I'm still working 
on that, a quick note to level set:

I have been reading all of the Last Call responses as they have come in. 
I am in the process of reviewing the comments and making a summary of 
the issues and responses. I have asked SM as document shepherd to do the 
same. (Being far more diligent than I, SM has completed his review 
already and is waiting on me.) We will be comparing notes and posting a 
summary of the issues and how they were addressed, along with whether we 
think they are resolved. That will give folks who disagree with my 
assessment one last chance to say, "Pete, you completely misunderstood 
what my objection / response was saying and you should re-evaluate your 
consensus determination on this issue." After that all shakes out, I'll 
make the final call on consensus.

An important thing to note is that I am seeing scant little I would call 
a "new argument" since late last week, so I would suggest that you are 
probably not adding to my understanding of the consensus by continuing 
to post. I'd like to think that everyone would be able to notice that 
things have gotten repetitive, both the folks who are repeating things 
as well as the folks who think they have to keep answering, but there 
does seem to be a bit of "getting the last word in" going on. Doing so 
isn't likely to add to my understanding or sway my opinion of the 
consensus (since I'm making a list of independent issues and their 
answers, not counting posts), but it does make it take longer for me to 
get through my review. So I'd recommend posting judiciously, at least 
until you see my summary.

Thanks,

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - [phone]