Michael Thomas wrote:
And as far as I can tell, you alone seem to be carrying this torch
here. Changing what we agreed on with rfc5016 should require a very
high barrier. I see little if any support, let alone broad consensus
that we got it wrong.
So, you missed the postings by Levine and Atkins? (Perhaps some others were
on "my" side of this topic, but these two were at least quite explicit.)
I guess they don't know much about the topic or anti-abuse recipient
operations behavior, so it's probably ok to keep this an individual ad hominem
dismissal.
I've tried to recruit postings by some other anti-abuse folks who have
expressed strongly negative opinions, but they have declined, indicating that
they try to avoid being abused, and do not see any indication of interest in
serious discussion about this in this group.
From the style of quite a few postings on the list, can you blame them?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html