I dont particularly care if ADSP sinks .. i= being forced / mandated,
with various contortionist use-case scenarios isnt really going to
make it all that much of a hit among receivers.
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 3:21 AM, Stephen Farrell
<stephen(_dot_)farrell(_at_)cs(_dot_)tcd(_dot_)ie> wrote:
John Levine wrote:
Except that the UAID might or might not be an e-mail address. The one
on this messgage isn't.
So, for clarity, can you (or someone) call out what you think is
the impact, if any, for ADSP, caused by this proposed change to
4871.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html