Before I attempt to answer Dave's question, I have two questions for the Chairs:
1. Is discussion of ADSP on the list in order again? 2. It sounds like what's being proposed here is a "do over" of the WG and IETF Last Calls on the ADSP specification, by making a substantial change. Is that in order? -Jim Dave CROCKER wrote: > Isn't it much simpler, and entirely sufficient, to have ADSP use SDID (d=)? > > I am not understanding the downside to the choice. > > The alternatives all seem significantly more complicated and probably > problematic. > > d/ > > _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
