Mike,
Given the existence of thousands of messages in the archive, it won't be much
effort for you to point me to a thread of them. The one thing I will ask,
however, is that it not merely be a reference to the issue, but rather a
thread in which the perspective is in fact, considered and incorporated into
the design process.
I ask for the pointer because I'm not aware of such consideration taking place.
d/
Michael Thomas wrote:
Dave Crocker wrote:
Sorry it was not clear that the issue has been that working group
discussion has only been from the perspective you describe and rather
steadfastly 'left out' the one I described.
Of course, any reasonable discussion would include both. But that
first requires acknowledging the relevance of both.
We have acknowledged the relevance of both. This was discussed
ad nauseum in the thousands of messages about third party vouching,
added as provisional requirements, ID's written, and ultimately rejected.
I'm not sure how you could have missed that, but I know that my mind
was numb for the experience.
Mike
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html