On 8/5/23 9:05 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 2:46 PM Michael Thomas <[email protected]> wrote:
Well, for starters ARC doesn't have broad deployment. But the
author doesn't say why ARC is needed or relevant. That is the
point here. *All* changes need to be justified including any
imported mechanisms. The less rat holes the better. Same with the
mailing list modification draft. Why is that even relevant?
With respect to ARC: There's a difference between asking for
justification and demanding that the discussion be stopped before it
even starts. One of those is not okay.
Ok, justify it. Even the author says ARC brings nothing to the table.
That is not OK. Peddle the ARC agenda in a more appropriate venue.
With respect to the MLM draft: Since this is the only IETF list that
covers DKIM specifically, that makes it a reasonable venue for raising
DKIM-related ideas that might exceed the charter. I would agree that
this WG shouldn't take up any DKIM topics not related to the replay
problem, but I don't see an issue with announcing in this venue that
you have an idea and invite discussion off-list or in some other venue
for as long as this list is allocated to an active working group.
By all means, let's make this a cesspool of irrelevant junk. Especially
for junk that clearly has no clue about the history of DKIM.
Mike
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim
