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

[Andrew Sullivan <[e-mail]>]

Speaking as the SPFBIS co-chair…

On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 04:55:33AM -0700, manning bill wrote:
> to see if the trend has changed (modulo PAFs observations that not all TXT == SPF).   In the mean time, declare a suspension of
> last call to gauge if the presumption of failure of the SPF RR merits this drastic action.

I think this would have been a fair request for the LC of RFC 6686,
which was presenting data about the state of the world at the time.
We had a heck of a time getting people to review that document, to
provide data, or to analyse the data.  I think it's unfair to the WG
to have refused to pitch in, and now to tell the WG that it has to sit
on its hands and then do some more work later, particularly because
these two data sets are hardly representative ones.  If we're going to
undertake a large scale data gathering experiment, I'll be all for it
as soon as we have some really large mail system operators involved.
(We did have those in SPFBIS, please note.)

Best,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[e-mail]