We have a single body deciding this, non-democratically. This isn't how RFCs used to work, how html used to be decided, how standards are crafted. The "big bo

We have a single body deciding this, non-democratically. This isn't how RFCs used to work, how html used to be decided, how standards are crafted. The "big boys" aren't the standard setters of the older internet. For example, the more often you need to get a key, the more interactions you have where a leak may occur. If you get keys 36 times in 3 years, instead of once in 3 years, you're that many times more exposed. Further, automation provides many edge cases for non-human monitored issues to occur. A process that requires human intervention at least requires someone to see the process. Automation can be setup years ago, and people may not even realise it is occurring. That doesn't help security. At all. As I said, it's NIST forced password rotation all over again. Attempts to make things better, but the end result is worse. And of course Google thinks this is all grant. After all, in their eyes small mail servers, hobby mail servers, small orgs doing it on their own are a hassle. Everyone should just use gmail, yes?