Summary: Has enough positions to pass.
Ballot question: "Do we approve these RFC status changes?"
One suggestion: I thought "This document acknowledges that Sender ID did not pass its experiment," was pretty vague. Perhaps something like "This document acknowledges that Sender ID did not demonstrate acceptance, so that further experiments are not justified, and,"
As per email@example.com discussion, we should get closure on whether SUBMITTER SMTP extension needs to be moved to Historic. I am going to defer the document for 2 weeks to get closure on this. As per firstname.lastname@example.org discussion, this should also add a note to "SMTP Service Extensions" registry on <https://www.iana.org/assignments/mail-parameters/mail-parameters.xhtml> saying that SUBMITTER was moved to historic. It should retain the current reference + have the reference to this document change status.