On 5/4/2011 2:29 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: > I should also expand that this entire situation started with Crocker > insisting that we must "choose" between between i= and d= > as The Output. It was a false dilemma then, and it remains > a false dilemma. And as with all false dilemmas it only causes > heat instead of light.
Right. It was all me. Another ad hominem. Nice. But then I suppose the question is why you "should" have included that explansion. Anyhow, its bad there wasn't any working group consensus on the changes. I guess that means that the published, normative Update RFC was a violation of IETF principles and process. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
