On 08/05/2011 20:11, Dave CROCKER wrote:
On 8/5/2011 2:56 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
To me it boils down to you saying in effect, "Here is my way of working
with e-mail, and I'd like the IETF to support it." If there was a way
that we could do that which had no impact on people who don't work that
way (such as the List-Id header) then I'd say go for it! But for those
of us who already filter our mail into folders these [tags] are useless
clutter that take up valuable screen real estate.
Doug,
Perhaps you missed the part about this being common practice, including
for other IETF mailing lists?
Why yes Dave, this is my first time writing an e-mail, or participating
in a, what do you call them? Mailing list? So thanks for pointing that
out to me.
You are already suffering with the useless clutter. The incremental
pain for you is going to be nil.
That's the argument of someone who thinks that the thing proposed is a
good idea. If you believed it to be a bad idea I'm sure that you
wouldn't be suggesting that we add to the incremental pain.
If they break dkim that's a whole 'nother category of problems.
DKIM is designed for to deal with one posting and one delivery. Mailing
lists take delivery and re-post. For almost all scenarios, DKIM was not
intended to survive re-posting.
I wasn't referring to the post from the originator to the list, I was
referring to the message posted from the list.
Doug
--
Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
-- OK Go
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf