Re: 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 <[e-mail]>]

On 8/29/2013 9:31 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
> I may be violating my promise to myself to stay out of
> SPF-specific issues,


Probably not, since your note has little to do with the realities of the 
SPFbis draft, which is a chartered working group product.  You might 
want to review its charter:

      http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/spfbis/charter/

Note the specified goal of standards track and the /very/ severe 
constraints on work to be done.  Please remember that this is a charter 
that was approved by the IESG.  The working group produced was it was 
chartered to produce, for the purpose that was chartered.

More broadly, you (and others) might want to review that actual criteria 
the IETF has specified for Proposed in RFC2026.  Most of us like to cite 
all manner of personal criteria we consider important.  Though 
appealing, none of them is assigned formal status by the IETF, with 
respect to the Proposed Standards label; I believe in fact that there is 
nothing that we can point to, for such other criteria, represents IETF 
consensus for them.  The claim that we can't really document our 
criteria mostly means that we think it's ok to be subjective and 
whimsical.

Also for the broader topic, you also might want to reevaluate much of 
what your note does say, in light of the realities of Individual 
Submission (on the IETF track) which essentially never conforms to the 
criteria and concerns you seem to be asserting.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net