> I don't recollect you proposing wording that included "silently" so it > isn't even possible for a person going back and look at the discussions > to know what you meant. > > We are therefore left with what you wrote and which the working group > came to a consensus on.
Whatever. I find it hard to see how anyone could interpret the RFC and the discussion leading up to it as a hidden consensus to send spam every time a receiver saw "dkim=discardable", but I'm clearly not going to persuade you otherwise. R's, John _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
