> Here's my guess. I don't think Arvel is opposed. As an implementor he
> just wants to know what code to write.

That's right. I'm not opposed. I have the occasional questions for my own learning (sorry) and Ned has answered them well in this case. I agree that implementation requirements make sense on both ends as Ned said previously.

--
Arvel


_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

Reply via email to