Such complaints would naturally be offlist from non or part time
participants at industry meetings, commercial contacts and other venues
Thanks,
Bill Oxley
Messaging Engineer
Cox Communications
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Scott Kitterman
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 12:46 PM
To: ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues inJanuary using
jabber/concalls....
On Tuesday 11 December 2007 12:35, Dave Crocker wrote:
Stephen Farrell wrote:
Who is the 'everyone' that you are relying on to vet the decision
to do
a variance?
I'm assuming the people subscribed here and the ADs.
For a working group that has repeatedly received complaints about
being
exclusive, it would make sense to be particularly careful to follow
procedures that encourage participation. Sufficient advanced notice
seems
a natural part of that.
d/
I'm not aware of any such complaints. Would you please provide
references for
this assertion?
Scott K
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html