[ietf-dkim] Let's avoid "opaque"

[Roland Turner]

+1 for opaque; the current usage is consistent with its widespread usage
in other contexts.

- Roland


On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 21:01 +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 8:57 PM, Al Iverson <aiverson at spamresource.com> wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > I personally think "opaque" is an appropriate term. It's a pretty
> > common use of the term. However, I am likely going to be fine with
> > suggested replacement text.
> >
> 
> +1 for opaque. People seeking alternatives are cordially requested to
> consult a copy of Websters Thesaurus.
> 
> srs
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
-- 
  Roland Turner | Product Manager, RealMail | BoxSentry Pte Ltd
  3 Phillip Street, #13-03 Commerce Point, Singapore 048693
  Mob: +65 96700022 | Skype: roland.turner | Fax: +65 65365463
  roland.turner at boxsentry.com | www.boxsentry.com