On October 12, 2005 at 08:23, Ned Freed wrote:
How about something along these lines instead:
"The working group recognizes that a significant amount of
infrastructure and deployed software already compatible
with the input specifications currently exists. The working
group will therefore make every reasonable effort to refrain
from introducing incompatible change."
I like it.
This can open up a political can of worms. I.e. Some parties may
continue to push the adoption of DKIM, as it is defined now, to
make it more difficult to make any changes despite any flaws DKIM
may have.
It is interesting that something like the above will be adopted when a
clear threat analysis has not been provided (although Jim's document
is a good start), debates raised about what the scope of DKIM should
be, and the existence of known problems with the draft specifications.
--ewh
_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org