> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Barry Leiba > Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 2:29 PM > To: MH Michael Hammer (5304) > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: [ietf-dkim] Issue: Consider deprecating "l=" > > So I'll ask it this way, starting a new thread for it: > I determine from discussion that there's enough support for > deprecating "l=" to qualify as rough consensus *if* there's not much > objection to it. It's the objection we need to gauge. Please post to > this thread if you object to deprecating "l=" in 4871bis. You may say > why you object, but please keep it brief, and let's not have a lot of > discussion of it here. If there's enough objection to derail > deprecation, we will leave it alone. > > You may also weigh in as objecting if you don't want to delay the > document by doing this. I'll let this go until 25 May, or until > there's enough objection that we have our answer, whichever comes > first. If we decide to deprecate it, I'll ask Murray to make the > edits, and then we'll need to have the working group approve the > result, so I expect that'll take another two weeks or so -- say, until > 11 June.
I object mainly for procedural reasons, and not technical ones: - I don't want to hold up -bis any longer; - the PS-DS promotion "rules" say we should cut stuff that's not actually in use, but this is; - we therefore don't have any data to conclude that there isn't anyone out there that finds it exceptionally useful despite the dangers -MSK _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
