Re: Comments requested on recent appeal to the IESG

From: John Levine <johnl at iecc.com>
To: ietf at ietf.org
Date: 20 Feb 2009 09:44:13 -0000
In-reply-to: <20090220013123.A3F113A69A3 at core3.amsl.com>

>   http://www.ietf.org/IESG/APPEALS/appeal-otis-2009-02-16.txt

This appeal boils down to "someone might misuse it so don't
standardize it."  Is there any standard to which someone couldn't have
made a similar objection?

Much of the bad stuff they say about SPF and Sender-ID is correct, but
it'll be equally true whether or not a header reports the results.

I have reviewed the draft and find it to be technically sound.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl at iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor
"More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Comments requested on recent appeal to the IESG
  - From: Doug Otis

References:
- Comments requested on recent appeal to the IESG
  - From: The IESG

Prev by Date: Weekly posting summary for ietf at ietf.org
Next by Date: Re: [Trustees] Last Call for Comments: Proposed work-around to the Pre-5378 Problem
Previous by thread: Re: Comments requested on recent appeal to the IESG
Next by thread: Re: Comments requested on recent appeal to the IESG
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Re: Comments requested on recent appeal to the IESG

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.