> 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.
That was quick. I believe we already have enough objections to say that we do NOT have rough consensus for deprecating l= at this time. I'll close the issue in the tracker (issue #26), and we will leave it as it is. Of course, folks may, if it makes them feel good, continue to register objections here. :-D Barry, as chair _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
