RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02 MARID<ietf-mxcomp@imc.org>
"Thomas Gal" <tom@triagewireless.com> Sat, 27 August 2005 18:22 UTC
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1E95Ja-000311-HW; Sat, 27 Aug 2005 14:22:02 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1E95JY-00030N-AK for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 27 Aug 2005 14:22:00 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA23144 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 27 Aug 2005 14:21:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from c-064-186-224-138.sd2.redwire.net ([64.186.224.138] helo=triagewireless.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E95KU-000793-KV for ietf@ietf.org; Sat, 27 Aug 2005 14:23:01 -0400
Received: from [66.27.68.108] (helo=horatio) by triagewireless.com with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1E94Ez-0000WB-00; Sat, 27 Aug 2005 10:13:13 -0700
From: Thomas Gal <tom@triagewireless.com>
To: 'Frank Ellermann' <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>, ietf@ietf.org
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2005 11:21:01 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
In-Reply-To: <430FE7A8.644@xyzzy.claranet.de>
Thread-Index: AcWqtD6KfenfJGHKTSqMKDNV95SKzgAeUcsA
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670
Message-Id: <E1E94Ez-0000WB-00@triagewireless.com>
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 25620135586de10c627e3628c432b04a
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ietf-mxcomp@imc.org
Subject: RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02 MARID<ietf-mxcomp@imc.org>
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
Well clearly IANA won't accept 2 differing registrations that overlap on this matter. Certainly it is the IETF/IESG/IAB's job to rectify that incongruity? If the two proposals cannot come to a resolution regarding the differing interpretations of the DNS records then clearly they must be required to use different/non-overlapping syntax. For the IESG to say "Change your records to v=senderid or something that doesn't conflict with this other previously printed document and large number of installations or we can't really distribute this document" makes perfect sense. Certainly, though everyone may not agree on the solution, we agrees that publishing both unchanged seems silly(using common sense not procedure for a moment)? Certainly not publishing either seems to make more sense than publishing both. If these documents are distributed elsewhere and conflicting that's one thing (beccause they'll be read no matter which forum they are distributed through), but if we distribute them without anything close to rough consensus on the acceptability of this conflict between documents (which I don't think we have) then what has anyone accomplished? Have we followed the spirit of our rules (rough consensus and working code) if it's clear that it's NOT POSSIBLE to have working code because the proposals are mutually exclusive? I'm not going to try to harp on IPR, or the end of the IETF, or industry blah blah regarding this decision, but this decision seems important, so iresspective of all the other things involved, I think it's important that a good decision is made on this matter. No consensus and non possiblity for working code. I would be interested in polling to know how people feel on these 2 matters: (1) This draft should not be published by the IETF due, at LEAST due to the fundamental conflict with SPF, which makes running code impossible. Even a split on this issue will indicate lack of consensus for publishing this document. (2) The document should either: a. be published elsewhere if consistency (i.e. no changes) is paramount b. the conflict should be resolved (most useful, least likely based on history) c. the syntax should be changed by the RFC editor (or author) which will essentially also resolve the conflict, make the documents consistent, and not sacrafice IETF principles. -Tom -----Original Message----- From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Frank Ellermann Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 9:10 PM To: ietf@ietf.org Cc: ietf-mxcomp@imc.org Subject: Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02 MARID<ietf-mxcomp@imc.org> Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > It is an absolutely incredible request since SPF uses these records > since its beginning (a long time before Sender-ID > existed) and since there is (unlike SenderID) actual deployment, which > can not be called back. SPF is also older than Caller-ID, a patented XML-over-DNS idea. JFTR, Frank _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-0… Julian Mehnle
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Bill Sommerfeld
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Ned Freed
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Bill Sommerfeld
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Dave Crocker
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Spencer Dawkins
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Theodore Ts'o
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Douglas Otis
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Julian Mehnle
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Julian Mehnle
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Andrew Newton
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Andrew Newton
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Andrew Newton
- RE: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… Sam Hartman
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… wayne
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Julian Mehnle
- Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… wayne
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Frank Ellermann
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Julian Mehnle
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Frank Ellermann
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Frank Ellermann
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Frank Ellermann
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Frank Ellermann
- Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… wayne
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Frank Ellermann
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Frank Ellermann
- RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Thomas Gal
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Frank Ellermann
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Bruce Lilly
- Is it necessary to go through Standards Track to … C. M. Heard
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… wayne
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Scott W Brim
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… wayne
- Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… wayne
- Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… Douglas Otis
- Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… Dotzero
- RE: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… Jeff Macdonald
- Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… wayne
- Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… Douglas Otis
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Frank Ellermann
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Pekka Savola
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… william(at)elan.net
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Julian Mehnle
- Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… Dick St.Peters
- Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… wayne
- Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… wayne
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… wayne
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Julian Mehnle
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… wayne
- Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… Dick St.Peters
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Frank Ellermann
- Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… william(at)elan.net
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… wayne
- Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… Sam Hartman
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… wayne
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… wayne
- Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draf… william(at)elan.net
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Frank Ellermann
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Frank Ellermann
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Bob Braden
- Re declare SPF and Sender-ID to be Informational John Levine
- Re: Re declare SPF and Sender-ID to be Informatio… Dave Crocker
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Frank Ellermann
- Re: Re declare SPF and Sender-ID to be Informatio… wayne
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… wayne
- Re: Re declare SPF and Sender-ID to be Informatio… John Levine
- Re: Re declare SPF and Sender-ID to be Informatio… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: declare SPF and Sender-ID to be Informational Frank Ellermann
- Individual submissions and Informational RFCs wayne
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Sam Hartman
- Re: Individual submissions and Informational RFCs John C Klensin
- Re: Individual submissions and Informational RFCs Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: Individual submissions and Informational RFCs wayne
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Sam Hartman
- Last call IETF experiments (was: Appeal ....) Frank Ellermann
- Re: Last call IETF experiments Frank Ellermann
- Re: Last call IETF experiments (was: Appeal ....) John C Klensin
- Re: Last call IETF experiments Frank Ellermann
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Douglas Otis
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Frank Ellermann
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… wayne
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Keith Moore
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Douglas Otis
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… william(at)elan.net
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… Douglas Otis
- Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-co… william(at)elan.net
- SES or BATV (was: Publication of draft-lyon-sende… Frank Ellermann
- SES vs BATV Douglas Otis
- Re: Last call IETF experiments Sam Hartman
- Re: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in… Douglas Otis
- Re: Last call IETF experiments Frank Ellermann
- Re: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in… Frank Ellermann