J.D. Falk wrote:
Anyone else want to speak up on this issue? I think Murray and I are
hitting an impasse.
This is primarily a warning to implementers, right? So I think the
first sentence may be sufficient.
After more thought, I'm okay with moving this to a BCP document discussing use
of the header, but out of this document since we're talking about this document
becoming a standard.
Is that a reasonable compromise?
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html