Re: [ietf-dkim] Handling the errata after the consensus call

Dave CROCKER wrote:>
> 3.  While it's always nice to get more support for a draft, a review of the
> working group archive shows that none of those voting against
> draft-ietf-dkim-rfc4871-errata engaged in anything that looks like 
> negotiation;
Objection: ad hominem.

> they deny the problems that the draft addresses. 
Objection: strawman.

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