> It's a significant precedent that IETF charters have included language > of this sort when there has been a deployed base at the time the WG is > chartered. But can someone explain what's different in this wording > that warrants departing from the version on which there seems to be > rough consensus?
there isn't a DKIM WG yet, so "rough consensus" of the mailing list is irrelevant. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
