Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP requirements

["Hector Santos" <[e-mail]>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Crocker" <[e-mail]>


> If there is a problem with someone's statements, attack the
> merits, not the speaker.

According to John, no one understands SSP, we are in a SSP FOG, says there
is no logic to it,  indicates the IESG will not consider SSP, suggests
specifications has yet to be invented, begins to convince Michael to doubt
it, and therefore it will suit us all better if we drop SSP and begin to use
reputation systems.  John crossed the fine ethical line in cooperating
engineering when he has no interest in using SSP, is actively against it in
every shape and form, and begins to promote his own business.

That is slap in the face in all the work people are doing and to do
understand SSP and have no conflict of interest in pursuing its engineering
for the greater good of the community.

I am not the only one who feels this way.  But I am sorry I had to point it
out.

--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com






_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html