[ietf-dkim] Process Question
dhc at dcrocker.net
Thu Dec 13 11:58:42 PST 2007
Michael Thomas wrote:
> Dave Crocker wrote:
>> As for 5016, you are highlighting one of the problems with calling
>> such documents "requirements" since slavish adherence to its desires
>> eliminates any benefits from later insight.
> What you call "slavish", I'd characterize as water under the bridge.
Were mine the only voice raising concerns, that might be appropriate.
> What you seem to be saying is that any single person should be able
> to reopen with no barrier every bit of consensus that was achieved
> in rfc5016. I'd like to hear what the actual barrier ought to be
> from the chairs.
Since I didn't say or mean anything close to your interpretation, I can't
guess what prompted you to invent it.
More information about the ietf-dkim