[ietf-dkim] l= statistics was 23 again (sorry John) was Output
barryleiba at computer.org
Mon May 9 14:24:07 PDT 2011
> I'd like to request that we specifically test for consensus on
> deprecating "l=" through the usual +1/-1 approach. No miring, just a
Semantics first: we don't "vote" here.
OK, that taken care of, it's a fair request, because there's been a
lot of discussion about it. We certainly have a good base of support
for deprecating "l=".
So I'll ask it this way, starting a new thread for it:
I determine from discussion that there's enough support for
deprecating "l=" to qualify as rough consensus *if* there's not much
objection to it. It's the objection we need to gauge. Please post to
this thread if you object to deprecating "l=" in 4871bis. You may say
why you object, but please keep it brief, and let's not have a lot of
discussion of it here. If there's enough objection to derail
deprecation, we will leave it alone.
You may also weigh in as objecting if you don't want to delay the
document by doing this. I'll let this go until 25 May, or until
there's enough objection that we have our answer, whichever comes
first. If we decide to deprecate it, I'll ask Murray to make the
edits, and then we'll need to have the working group approve the
result, so I expect that'll take another two weeks or so -- say, until
Have at it.
Barry, as chair
More information about the ietf-dkim