Dave:
This topic was addressed at great length during development of the
DKIM charter, which says:
Experimentation has resulted in Internet deployment of these
specifications. Although not encouraged, non-backwards-compatible
changes to these specifications will be acceptable if the DKIM working
group determines that the changes are required to meet the group's
technical objectives.
If changes are needed, make them! Be aware of the backward
compatibility issues, but this cannot be used to stifle discussion or
innovation.
Russ
At 12:03 PM 3/22/2006, Dave Crocker wrote:
There is a difference between noting that the IETF specification is
in flux, versus predicting that the IETF will produce a final
specification that breaks the ability to have a signer who uses the
pre-ietf spec be validated by an implementor of the post-ietf draft.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html