Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02

Andrew Newton <[email protected]> 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.

That would be a good idea. As there is already more than one implementation of
the SPF protocol, should it not be possible to 'skip' the experimental phase
and go straight to the start of the standards track?