My recollection is that every issue raised, by anyone, got considered.
Well, you kept claiming that we couldn't possibly anticipate the ways in
which the DKIM protocol would be used, therefore there was no
justification for the WG to change DKIM significantly from its original
design.
1. I did not say anything like what you are stating. Please read more carefully.
2. I am but one voice. It means little what I say.
3. What DOES matter is that a) there was discussion, and b) you failed to obtain
group support. THESE mean quite a lot.
You continue to confuse your not getting what you want with a group's failing to
do due diligence. They are quite different.
The critical concept that you seem to make a point of missing is called "rough
consensus".
d/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf