Michael Thomas wrote:

> I don't see much if any support for changing the valid 
> first party signature consensus from rfc 5016, and I've
> seen a whole lot of -1's.

I've seen a bunch of objections against the redefinition
of originator (i.e. more than Dave+me+Dave+me+Dave+me ;-)

Maybe a poll could help to get a clearer picture of your
"a whole lot of" and my "a bunch of".  If the Chairs like
the idea, Harald sometimes uses polls, but it's a matter
of taste.

 Frank

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

Reply via email to