On Jun 16, 2006, at 3:08 PM, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
I would rather have a 6 month pushback from the IESG than a spec
that is dependent on the next release of Windows Server to become
viable.
The first does not delay deployment in the slightest. As far as I
am concerned its damn the torpedoes.
The second will mean as an absolute minimum waiting for a BIND
product cycle and will require a much higher degree of support from
ISPs and DNS Registrars.
Defining a DKIM specific RR type should not prevent deployment.
Defining the DKIM specific RR within the base draft means a new DKIM
version is not required to enable its use. If there are issues
handling a DKIM specific RR, this is a problem independent of DKIM.
A new RR issue, if there are any, may delay exclusive reliance upon
the DKIM specific RR.
-Doug
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
