[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Hector
Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 5:56 PM
To: Michael StJohns
Cc: IETF Discussion
Subject: Re: 2119bis
Good points, but the subtleties are too wide spread to generalize,
especially dealing with integrated protocols and now there are
boundary layers related issues.
DKIM MUST|SHOULD|MAY validate its input stream for illegal
multiple 8222.From fields because this has been shown to cause
a potential security exploit.
So this protracted (and, in my view, hijacked) sound-and-fury thread about
concerns with interpretation of RFC2119 and the rough consensus process, and
hints about an activist Area Director, is really just a platform to vent your
frustration with a decision made in a working group where you were in the
The issue to which you're referring closed months ago. After a long battle,
some compromise text was reached that included some of what you advocated,
which during IESG evaluation drew a DISCUSS and it was rolled back before being
approved for publication. This is all recorded in the archives.
It really is time to move on.
Ietf mailing list