I would sure rather the justification were published as an RFC so people can find the reasons in the future Scott > On May 12, 2018, at 12:28 PM, Kurt Andersen <kurta@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 3:49 PM, <ned+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Ditto. This change is if anything overdue. > > Ned > > > I fully agree with and support this status change. > > > Barry > > > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 12:20 PM, The IESG <iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > The IESG has received a request from DMARC WG to make the > > > following status changes: > > > > > > - RFC4405 from Experimental to Historic > > > (SMTP Service Extension for Indicating the Responsible Submitter of an > > > E-Mail Message) > > > > > > - RFC4406 from Experimental to Historic > > > (Sender ID: Authenticating E-Mail) > > > > > > - RFC4407 from Experimental to Historic > > > (Purported Responsible Address in E-Mail Messages) > > > > > > The supporting document for this request can be found here: > > > > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-change-sender-id-to-historic/ > > Completely in favor as I had initially proposed this during IETF101. > > --Kurt Andersen >
