Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Michael Thomas
Define "needed". If the standard of "needed" is "required to
make the protocol viable", then this is not "needed". If
"needed" means "anything we feel like changing, we can
change", then the words in the charter are meaningless.
Needed means that the value of making the change is justified by the cost of
making the change.
In this case the cost of the change now is much less than the cost will be
in the future. This particular change was proposed multiple times during the
development of DKIM (I was the proposer). Each time the pushback was the
cost of making the change.
Really? I don't remember that. In fact, there was no backward
compatibility issues at that time because the DKIM-Signature
header/hashing was different than the DK signature/hashing. As
I remember it, the chosen hash generation was different than both
IIM and DK. And here we are two years later, um, rehashing the
same decision.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html