Michael Thomas:
>
> I just don't get it. It seems to me that people who are advocating
> changing the spec are doing it in a complete vacuum of the wide
> deployment out there. Is DKIM broken? Manifestly not even a little
> which is quite remarkable.
>
> Every single suggestion has been debated in the past, and every
> suggestion if adopted would cause a wave of incompatibility
> problems. Any supposed "simplification" of the spec would be
> radically outweighed by dealing with the complexity of those
> incompatibilities. So "simplification" is not a valid argument.
>
> So what is the real motivation here? Is the real intent to cripple
> further deployment? Or maybe people don't have enough to do with
> their day jobs? Or maybe the thrill of making dev managers lives
> suck is just irresistible?
>
> If not, what?
This is not a discussion. This is an accusation. I will not play
your game, and I can only hope that others won't either.
Wietse
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
