IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02

wayne <wayne@schlitt.net> Sat, 10 December 2005 00:40 UTC

Received: from localhost.cnri.reston.va.us ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Eksmm-0004xs-Bf; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 19:40:24 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Eksmk-0004wm-9p for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 19:40:22 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA14377 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Dec 2005 19:39:27 -0500 (EST)
Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Eksn0-0000TP-P0 for ietf@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 19:40:40 -0500
Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1EkslR-00041F-7d for ietf@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 01:39:02 +0100
Received: from footbone.schlitt.net ([67.52.51.37]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 01:39:01 +0100
Received: from wayne by footbone.schlitt.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 01:39:01 +0100
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: ietf@ietf.org
From: wayne <wayne@schlitt.net>
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 18:37:03 -0600
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <x4fyp1n5xs.fsf@footbone.schlitt.net>
References: <200512092141.NAA00720@gra.isi.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: footbone.schlitt.net
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) XEmacs/21.4.17 (linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:pFbmp+X9KwtKkiPfEMGsENVReL4=
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126
Cc: spf-discuss@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

In <200512092141.NAA00720@gra.isi.edu> Bob Braden <braden@ISI.EDU> writes:

> This thread has contained several suggestions that publication of
> an RFC in the Experimental category constitutes an "IETF experiment".

This is, in part, due to the directions of the IESG.  For example, the
IESG note that will be placed at the top of these drafts refer to
things like a two year observation period.  So, while there isn't
anything in RFC2026 that documents what the IESG has requested, I
don't think the "experiment" term is being thrown around quite as
loosely as might first seem.

Still, I think you are correct that this is not your typical
"experimental" RFC process and people should be careful not to read
too much into the term.


-wayne


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email