It's called feature creep.
Hooey.
Really.
It is also entirely outside the scope of this working group.
Substantiate this incredible claim or please stop making it. It's just
plain false.
Really. It has nothing to do with DKIM and nothing to do with Author
Domain *signing*.
We're talking about an algorithm for what to do in the absence of DKIM
and signing. The NXDOMAIN check is a piece of that algorithm that makes
it work. Without it, our purpose is trivially defeated. Why can't you
see that?
Really. A working group's protocol specification effort is supposed to
be guided by more than a current feeling that it should tell folks what
is good for them.
That's not fair. Really. Really, really.
I and others have offered concrete specifics on why we know this is a
critical piece of the algorithm. That's not guidance by "current
feeling" or a desire to "tell folks what is good for them."
Arvel
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html