apologies for the lateness in this reply. i sent a reply yesterday, but
it seems to have gotten trapped somewhere.
i don't think there is anything in the text you cite that prevents the
wg from considering 2822 as a part of the solution. like it or not MTAs
know about 2822 content. in the simplest example of this, consider the
Received: header.
/mtr
On Jun 10, 2004, at 20:09, wayne wrote:
Yah know, I was poking around the MARID stuff and I re-read the
official MARID charter (see
In particular, I remembered this:
[...] the
first task of the working group will be to establish which of
these identities should be associated with MTA
authorization. Once this decision has been reached, it will
limit the scope of further activity in this working group, and
the chairs will rule out of order discussion related to schemes
which use other identities as the basis of authorization.
I also thought that all decisions made in meetings must be confirmed
on the mailing list.
Now, earlier there was a decision made to go with the 2821
identities. At the interim meeting, we suddenly changed to 2822
identities with a simple hum. Is it really possible to violate the
written charter with a single hum, late on the final day and not have
this change confirmed on the mailing list?