[ietf-dkim] Draft minutes...

[Eric Allman]

--On July 13, 2006 2:44:56 AM +0000 Mark Delany 
<MarkD+dkim at yahoo-inc.com> wrote:

> To my mind, the spec currently stands mid-way, it sort-of protects
> obvious headers but cannot possibly protect all, so my druthers is
> that we actually remove all compulsion as to which headers are
> signed as it may well look truly quaint in five years time when
> other important originator headers get created.

I have to admit that I disagree with the argument but do agree with 
the conclusion.  I don't think it's likely that after 29 years (since 
the publication of RFC 733) that we are suddenly going to want new 
originator headers in five years that will make the previous history 
look quaint.  It would take far more than five years to update the 
MUAs.  However, in the spirit of "mechanism, not policy" I think it's 
a good idea to pull out the normative language (perhaps retain it in 
yet another informative note).

eric