[ietf-dkim] requirement for one ADSP record per DNS entry is irrelevant

[Dave Crocker]

Eliot Lear wrote:
> John Levine wrote:
>> In any event, the tree walk is gone.  We voted, your side lost.  
>> Enough already.
> 
> We voted on a misconception you perpetuated.  We never had a tree walk.  
> The "vote" leaves the protocol undeployable.


Eliot,

This is both ad hominem and disruptive.

You are seeking review of an issue that has already been voted on, and you are 
doing it in the middle of the group's attempt to focus on a different and 
difficult topic.

In order to permit forward progress, rather than endlessly revisiting resolved 
topics the typical working group normal rule about re-raising a topic that has 
already been closed formally is that something has changed.  New insight, 
changed conditions, or the like.

What has changed, Eliot?

d/

-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net