Barry Leiba wrote: > I'm not in favour of complicating the protocol, when we can do what we > want to do with what's there. I'd really need to see significant new > use cases to drive any major change here.
+1 > On the other hand, I'd see nothing wrong if someone should want to > write a draft about mailing-list considerations, and propose it as a > working group item. But I'd want to see it as a draft that we can > review, not just as a few ideas in an email message. +1 Whoever wants to take on this project should feel free to borrow from the article I wrote in June: http://www.circleid.com/posts/dkim_for_discussion_lists/ -- J.D. Falk Return Path Inc http://www.returnpath.net/ _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
