ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1550 - the name of the document (remains open *briefly*); there's still,disagreement on "Author"

2008-03-11 15:21:40
Dave Crocker wrote:


Michael Thomas wrote:
It doesn't take much of a logic chain: the label first was _policy. 
Then it was _ssp. Now it's _asp. Tomorrow it might be _frodo. Next day
something else. Each time you change it, implementations break in a
showstopper way.


Your argument appears to be that people who implement Internet-Drafts 
should have sway over the ability to change those drafts.

Hold sway != have a say. I think that people who have some
skin in the game should be considered carefully. What I read
here is dismissal (= "hold sway").

That argument is not without precedent, but it almost never is 
acceptable to the working group to let that narrow installed base 
dictate working group choices.

Dave. My irritation here is that it doesn't seem to even be on anybody's
radar that you are breaking implementations utterly and completely.
Doing that is devaluing running code which last time I checked counts
for something. I'd really like to deploy something for the reflector,
but this silly last minute name changing makes that all pointless.

                Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>