> 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-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org

Reply via email to