Dave Crocker wrote:
So effectively the issue has changed from whether 30 days notice
really is required to whether what is really only 3 is somehow
acceptable. (RFC2418, Section 3.1
And no, this isn't about being a stickler about the rules.
It's about being inclusive.
Yep...given the lack of further comment about the recurring phone calls,
I assumed they wouldn't be happening and will instead be unavailable
during that time.
That's just me, though, and I'm assuming there'll be both a transcript
and an opportunity for further comment afterwards -- right?
--
J.D. Falk
Receiver Products
Return Path
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html