> Stephen Farrell wrote:
> > FWIW, I don't agree that this is just a DoS. At least some of the
> > issues raised haven't gotten much consideration over the last few
> > months and if we do want to produce a standards track SSP then we need
> > to do that level of review.
> +1
+1 as well.
> I share many of Dave's concerns, but he explains them better than I
> would -- and I'm trying to avoid a flood of +1 messages.
For me it's a question of dealing with the 300 or so messages sent since
the beginning of the month. I simply cannot keep up with this while also
dealing with all the other IETF work I have to track.
Ned
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
