On Apr 19, 2011, at 3:55 PM, John R. Levine wrote: >> I don't want to re-hash all the arguments. What we have is a compromise >> between two hard-argued positions, and I think reopening it now will just >> drag everything out even longer. > > I agree that the current language addresses the issue about as well as it > could be addressed, and see no advantage in rearguing it.
+1 -- J.D. Falk the leading purveyor of industry counter-rhetoric solutions _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
