Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Delany
>
>> Me three. As a long-time implementor I suck at getting
>> un-exercised code right. I'd much prefer agility to be
>> essential to a day one deployment, as it'll otherwise never work.
>
> The only downside is that this does render the legacy base obsolete. But
> this is probably not such a great hardship. It might even be a benefit
> as people are more likely to upgrade for higher security.
The legacy base of verification code would need to be upgraded ASAP. The
legacy base of signing code could take more time.
Besides, there are already other minor changes in the draft, and certain
to be more in the future, that will require the legacy base to be upgraded.
Tony Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
