Re: Appeal against IESG blocking DISCUSS on draft-klensin-rfc2821bis

["Spencer Dawkins" <[e-mail]>]

By now, I'm hoping that the IESG has enough public and private feedback on 
this topic to do the right thing (whatever that is, and yes, I also have an 
opinion about what the IESG should be doing, which I'm not including here).

Do we need to say more? If not, perhaps we could wait for the IESG to 
respond, and then do the right thing from our end, if needed.

If we do need to say more, by all means, keep typing...

Thanks,

Spencer


> No, you're not the only one seeing insanity.
>
> - Ralph
>
> On Jun 18, 2008, at Jun 18, 2008,12:44 PM, Bob Hinden wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Let me see if I understand this.
>>
>> - This is the specification for SMTP.  It's was first used on the
>> Arpanet.
>>
>> - It is probably as widely deployed as IP and TCP.  Maybe more so.
>>
>> - It works (e.g., the email discussing this thread was sent via SMTP).
>>
>> - The IETF is now advancing it to Draft Standard.  I assume this means
>> that we now have enough implementation experience.
>>
>> - Now the IESG doesn't want to approve it for Draft Standard because
>> it is using a different set of example domains instead of the official
>> IETF ones.
>>
>> Am I the only one who sees the insanity here?
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> IETF mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>
> _______________________________________________
> IETF mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 


_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf