Re: Last Call: Change the status of ADSP (RFC 5617) to Internet Standard

2013-10-03 Thread Dave Crocker
On 10/2/2013 11:46 AM, John C Klensin wrote: I assume we will need to agree to disagree about this, but... --On Wednesday, October 02, 2013 10:44 -0700 Dave Crocker wrote: If a spec is Historic, it is redundant to say not recommended. As in, duh... "Duh" notwithstanding, we move documents t

Re: Last Call: Change the status of ADSP (RFC 5617) to Internet Standard

2013-10-03 Thread Murray S. Kucherawy
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:53 AM, Hector Santos wrote: > > I don't believe this would be a fair assessment of industry wide support > -- using only one API to measure. There are other APIs and proprietary > systems who most likely are not part of the OpenDKIM group. There are > commercial operatio

Re: Last Call: Change the status of ADSP (RFC 5617) to Internet Standard

2013-10-03 Thread Douglas Otis
On Oct 3, 2013, at 4:53 AM, Hector Santos wrote: > > On 10/2/2013 5:04 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 7:41 AM, The IESG wrote: >> >>> The IESG has received a request from an individual participant to make >>> the following status changes: >>> >>> - RFC5617 from Prop

Re: Last Call: Change the status of ADSP (RFC 5617) to Internet Standard

2013-10-03 Thread Barry Leiba
>> Hi. Just to be sure that everyone has the same understanding of >> what is being proposed here, the above says "to Historic" but >> the writeup at >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-adsp-rfc5617-to-historic/ >> says "to Internet Standard". Can one or the other be corrected? > >

Re: Last Call: Change the status of ADSP (RFC 5617) to Internet Standard

2013-10-03 Thread Hector Santos
On 10/2/2013 5:04 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 7:41 AM, The IESG wrote: The IESG has received a request from an individual participant to make the following status changes: - RFC5617 from Proposed Standard to Historic The supporting document for this request can be

Re: Last Call: Change the status of ADSP (RFC 5617) to Internet Standard

2013-10-02 Thread Murray S. Kucherawy
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 7:41 AM, The IESG wrote: > The IESG has received a request from an individual participant to make > the following status changes: > > - RFC5617 from Proposed Standard to Historic > > The supporting document for this request can be found here: > > http://datatracker.ietf.org

Re: Last Call: Change the status of ADSP (RFC 5617) to Internet Standard

2013-10-02 Thread John C Klensin
I assume we will need to agree to disagree about this, but... --On Wednesday, October 02, 2013 10:44 -0700 Dave Crocker wrote: > If a spec is Historic, it is redundant to say not recommended. > As in, duh... "Duh" notwithstanding, we move documents to Historic for many reasons. RFC 2026 lists

Re: Last Call: Change the status of ADSP (RFC 5617) to Internet Standard

2013-10-02 Thread Dave Crocker
On 10/2/2013 9:28 AM, John C Klensin wrote: After reading the description at the link cited above and assuming that "Historic" is actually intended, I wonder, procedurally, whether a move to Historic without document other than in the tracker is an appropriate substitute for the publication of an

RE: Last Call: Change the status of ADSP (RFC 5617) to Internet Standard

2013-10-02 Thread ietfdbh
: ietf-announce-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-announce- > boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of The IESG > Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2013 10:42 AM > To: IETF-Announce > Subject: Last Call: Change the status of ADSP (RFC 5617) to Internet Standard > > > The IESG has received a request fro

Re: Last Call: Change the status of ADSP (RFC 5617) to Internet Standard

2013-10-02 Thread Barry Leiba
> Hi. Just to be sure that everyone has the same understanding of > what is being proposed here, the above says "to Historic" but > the writeup at > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-adsp-rfc5617-to-historic/ > says "to Internet Standard". Can one or the other be corrected? Gakk. I

Re: Last Call: Change the status of ADSP (RFC 5617) to Internet Standard

2013-10-02 Thread John C Klensin
--On Wednesday, October 02, 2013 07:41 -0700 The IESG wrote: > > The IESG has received a request from an individual participant > to make the following status changes: > > - RFC5617 from Proposed Standard to Historic > > The supporting document for this request can be found here: > > http://d

Re: Last Call: Change the status of ADSP (RFC 5617) to Internet Standard

2013-10-02 Thread John Levine
>The IESG has received a request from an individual participant to make >the following status changes: > >- RFC5617 from Proposed Standard to Historic > >The supporting document for this request can be found here: > >http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-adsp-rfc5617-to-historic/ I'm one o