On 08/21/2013 03:44 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > Speaking as the SPFBIS co-chair… > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 04:55:33AM -0700, manning bill wrote: >> to see if the trend has changed (modulo PAFs observations that not all TXT >> == SPF). In the mean time, declare a suspension of >> last call to gauge if the presumption of failure of the SPF RR merits this >> drastic action. > > I think this would have been a fair request for the LC of RFC 6686, > which was presenting data about the state of the world at the time. > We had a heck of a time getting people to review that document, to > provide data, or to analyse the data. I think it's unfair to the WG > to have refused to pitch in, and now to tell the WG that it has to sit > on its hands and then do some more work later, particularly because > these two data sets are hardly representative ones. If we're going to > undertake a large scale data gathering experiment, I'll be all for it > as soon as we have some really large mail system operators involved. > (We did have those in SPFBIS, please note.) >
Just wondering, could OARC's recent DITL data help? (perhaps if only to see whether another large-scale targeted effort is needed) I definitely see TYPE=99 queries on our servers, but I can't see the answers. Jelte
