Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02 MARID <[email protected]>

On Aug 26, 2005, at 9:15 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:

>
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 08:47:17AM -0400,
>  Andrew Newton <[email protected]> wrote
>  a message of 21 lines which said:
>
>
>> If this is the source of the conflict, then BOTH experiments should
>> not use the v=spf1 records.
>>
>
> It is an absolutely incredible request since SPF uses these records
> since its beginning (a long time before Sender-ID existed) and since
> there is (unlike SenderID) actual deployment, which can not be called
> back.

Is this appeal about avoiding further conflict or is it about  
challenging past differences?

-andy

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf