At 15:48 02-06-2009, Jon Callas wrote:
Stepping back for a moment, we have a number of questions that are
on their surface reasonable questions.
Most of the questions asked seem reasonable to me. Having to answer
them all is another question.
For some set of features, should a given feature be removed?
It's two years too late to answer that.
Standardization is a process of compromise. In the IETF, we
pronounce compromise as "rough consensus." In any compromise or
rough consensus, there are things that are controversies. For my
purposes here, I will define "controversy" to be anything that is
not unanimous.
Yes. And some of the features that have been added were
controversial at that time. If we want our implementation to be RFC
4871 compliant, we implement these features. There is nothing that
forces us to implement a feature we view as "bad". We can even say
that our implementation is RFC 4871 compliant but that doesn't make
the implementation interoperable.
Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html