In <7E876E12-3D43-4BFB-8F5B-76C3E985A610@xxxxxx> Andrew Newton <andy@xxxxxx> writes: > But since you brought this up: if you (the author of the document) do > not consider this to be an experiment, then perhaps the IETF should > not publish SPF as an Experimental RFC. I asked for the IESG to not consider the SPF I-D to be experiemental. It was turned down. According to Ted, *none* of the IESG members expressed interest in changing the status from Experiemental. So far, no one has appealed that decision, and there are only a few days left to do so. Like the appeal on the re-use of SPFv1 records, I don't think it would be a productive use of my time to write an appeal on the experimental status, and thus I won't do it. -wayne _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
