On 5/4/2011 2:29 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
I should also expand that this entire situation started with Crocker
insisting that we must "choose" between between i= and d=
as The Output. It was a false dilemma then, and it remains
a false dilemma. And as with all false dilemmas it only causes
heat instead of light.
Right. It was all me. Another ad hominem. Nice.
But then I suppose the question is why you "should" have included that
explansion.
Anyhow, its bad there wasn't any working group consensus on the changes. I
guess that means that the published, normative Update RFC was a violation of
IETF principles and process.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html