|
Re: r= for instilling good domain-name practices: msg#00586ietf.dkim
You're trying to fit reputation policy -- which is a sociopolitical issue -- into a technical standard. A peg of infinite dimensions into a hole of intentionally finite dimensions. The likelihood that it'll fit is infinitely small. With some regularity, we have someone offering a proposal that gets no support, but still prompts people to post lots of responses. This thread appears to be yet-another one of those. Here is a simple suggestion: When someone makes a proposal, those who disagree with it should wait until the proposal shows some signs of support from others. Really. It will dramatically cut down the noise on the list. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://bbiw.net> |
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | Re: Re: What the verifier can do: 00586, Dave Crocker |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: What the verifier can do: 00586, Tony Hansen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: r= for instilling good domain-name practicesi: 00586, Douglas Otis |
| Next by Thread: | dkim-base-01 nits and semi-nits: 00586, Jim Fenton |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
| News | FAQ | advertise |