Are people signing messages using l=?
To move to Draft Standard, a feature needs 1) to be used, and 2) to be
interoperable.
>From the interop tests, I know that various implementations are able to
verify signatures that were signed with l=. So it *is* interoperable.
However, if no one has deployed with l= signatures, then it can be
safely removed *because* no one is using it.
But if *anyone* is signing with it, then it cannot be safely removed as
part of moving to Draft Standard. Then such a change would require
recycling back at Proposed Standard.
Tony Hansen
[email protected]
Barry Leiba wrote:
> I'm going to make one attempt here, and then give this topic up: ...
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
