In <BDBCF168EBB17380F9E811F3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > --On onsdag, august 10, 2005 02:46:57 -0500 wayne <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> The working group was shut down because no consensus could be >> reached. I think the lack of working code was one of the core causes >> of the lack of consensus. >> > > Don't be shy about naming names.... > > The MARID WG had one proposal (SPF) with running code and multiple > implementations (I know nothing about whether the other proposals had > implementations). It still failed to reach consensus. Of the half dozen or so input documents to MARID, both SPF and DMP had running code. The WG decided not to adopt either of those two proposals and instead went with an untested system. (Ok, at almost the very last minute, some working code to support the PRA was created, but no significant testing was done.) > It may say something about the value we place on running code, but I > think it's hard to use it as an example of a situation with NO running > code. There was NO running code for the PRA during most of MARID's existence. -wayne _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf