In article <CAL0qLwbyCEJjvGFi5pfu83MFS=+duihcf4cvaf3xtdasum1...@mail.gmail.com> you write: >Given that we've settled on Experimental status, I propose this gets tabled >until that's published. The experiment will establish what benefit ARC can >provide, which I think is the most important output of this work. The >change being suggested here appears to be one of efficiency, not something >that will assist with evaluating that benefit.
Having written and deployed a bunch of ARC code, I do not believe that any sort of twiddle to try to combine one of the ARC headers with a DKIM signature would be productive, and I have no interest in going down that road. As I said in a previous message, the bloat wars are over and bloat won. Nobody cares any more about avoiding a few hundred bytes of message header. R's, John _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
