Keith, > > <http://mipassoc.org/spamops/request%20for%20BCP%20status.txt> > > > > This status file claims that the document in question has had "Multiple > references to the document in the IRTF's ASRG and the retained ietf- > smtp mailing list." I took the trouble to search my archives of the > ietf-smtp mailing list, and found exactly four mentions of that > document title or ID. Multiple: "Having, relating to, or consisting of more than one individual, element, part, or other component; manifold." Also, the statement carefully said "references" rather than discussion. So the statement makes no more than a minimal, and correct, claim. > While the claim in the status file is true on its face (there really > were multiple "references" to the document) one should not infer that > the document has actually been discussed on the ietf-smtp list, because indeed. one usually should not infer more than is said, particularly in a formal document. > Frankly, it's hard to see this as other than an attempt at an "end run" > around the SMTP developer community. Let's see: it gets announced multiple times on an smtp developer community mailing list. That community chooses not to pursue the matter. Your criteria for "end run" appear to be rather liberal, if not silly. You wouldn't be trying to delay things, so as to somehow force discussion of your now-competing document, would you? d/ --- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking +1.408.246.8253 dcrocker a t ... WE'VE MOVED to: www.bbiw.net _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf