Re: What this WG is doing

[lutz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Lutz Donnerhacke)]

* Adam Back wrote:
>> The main manifestation of this that I know of is the addition of a
>> CMRK subpacket in the signature packet.
>
>If this goes in, everyone will be arguing for their favourite
>extension of the day to go in, and there will be a messy political
>argument, so lets please get this draft out without further argument.

Current proposal includes it to avoid usage. This is required to deal
correctly with the already existing extension.