I'm trying to make the working group aware of possibly influential
dissent outside of the working group.
And how is that supposed to work ? Some persons known only to you
allegedly prefer the ssp-03 algorithm and are possibly influential;
what next ? There were tons of arguments in both directions, and
the arguments convincing folks coming to the same "no parent domain
magic" decision can be very different - I had "sitefinder" on my
list, and some bad pre-4408 memories with namedroppers flamewars.
Today I'd add the recent "public suffix list" debate. So I've also
some possibly influential folks telling me again and again that DNS
is not designed for "property inheritance", and that DNS zones are
unrelated to "ADMD"-s.
Now who's the one re-opening the topic?
I don't care what the "don't" reasons are anymore. I'm saying we have
to document them so that implementors understand the reasons it was
deliberately omitted, and currently (other than this mailing list
archive) we don't. I think that's a problem, because if we don't then
this will happen again, perhaps with the opposite result.
Is that suggestion really such lunacy?
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html