Mark Delany wrote:
Current DKIM deployment is infinitesimal compared to DK, so I find the
"already deployed" argument bogus in the extreme.
+1, thank you.
Of course I don't want a new IESG review or other delays.
Why not? What's the rush? DKIM has been alive for at least a year and DK
has been alive for at least two years? I don't understand why a small
delay to get something right is considered so negatively by a technical
standards group.
+1, thank you.
--
HLS
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html