Dave Crocker wrote:
>
>
> Michael Thomas wrote:
>> I'd be happy to change it back to ssp and ignore this churn altogether.
>
> I wouldn't. More importantly, I believe the working group achieved
> consensus on the current name.
>
>
>> Remember: each name change == interoperability stopper.
>
> I'd be quite interested in seeing your logic-chain to justify that
> assertion, for names on a draft document.
It doesn't take much of a logic chain: the label first was _policy. Then
it was _ssp. Now it's _asp. Tomorrow it might be _frodo. Next day
something else. Each time you change it, implementations break in a
showstopper way.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
