On 10/14/2010 6:30 PM, John R. Levine wrote:
I wouldn't be opposed to moving it to an appendix of deprecated features,
if for nothing else to ensure that some future DKIM++ doesn't
inadvertently reuse g= to mean something else.
Since this particular feature is apparently used in about .0007% of
signatures, I can't get too worked up about breaking stuff.
I consider this to be a clarification on how to go about "removing g=".
Tony
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html