ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Output summary - proposing ODID "Originating Domain Identity"

2011-05-04 16:49:40
On 05/04/2011 02:32 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:

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.
   

History is a personal attack? Who knew?

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.
   

One of the principles of DS is to remove things which aren't
implemented or serve no purpose. I think it's quite fitting to
ask that DS remove something that was added after the fact
in an errata update and has proved to be problematic. Does
the implementation report say who has implemented this
MUST? If not, why not? Could it be that it's untestable?

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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>