Subject: Re: [spfbis] spfbis - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 84

From: S Moonesamy <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:28:37 -0700

Hello,

The WG session at IETF 84 is scheduled as follows:

  spfbis Session 1 (0:30:00)
     Tuesday, Afternoon Session III 1700-1830
     Room Name: Georgia A

Please note that the WG Chairs would prefer not to have a session 
unless there are substantive issues which require face-to-face 
discussion.  I don't see any issue which qualify for that at the moment.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy
SPFBIS WG co-chair

---

From: Alessandro Vesely <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2012 12:34:59 +0200

>     Tuesday, Afternoon Session III 1700-1830

An interesting way to entertain ourselves would be to define a list of
pros and cons of adopting SPF, from a mail admin perspective.  The
results of that may support an evolutionary game-theoretical modeling
of SPF.  The latter, for example, might describe how a mail admin
population moves across strategies that involve strict record (-all),
strict behavior (reject-on-fail), and their loose counterparts.

Acquiring a better insight on such dynamics may help getting rid of
the need to protect outdated beliefs.

> discussion.

Does that reflect some sort of team-building technique?

---

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2012 07:48:23 -0400

> the need to protect outdated beliefs.

Are you planning to submit a draft along these lines?

> Does that reflect some sort of team-building technique?

No.  It reflects a view that the point of having a meeting is to solve
controversies that can be more effectively nailed down in the sort of
back and forth one can do in person.  I don't like having meetings for
the sake of them or just because we have a slot.  As it is, we asked
for 30 minutes but got more time.  If we don't actually need that
time, then it is better to cede it back to the IETF for other use.

Remember, the IETF's work happens on the mailing lists anyway --
anything we do in a meeting is required to be confirmed here.  But if
there remain controversies that are most easily aired in a meeting, it
will be useful to have a session.

Best,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[email-masked]

---

From: "John Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 30 Jun 2012 15:22:22 -0000

>pros and cons of adopting SPF, from a mail admin perspective.

If you're buying the beer, we'll be happy to meet in the bar in the
evening.  But not in a precious WG meeting slot.

R's,
John