ietf-clear
[Top] [All Lists]

[clear] Re: [ietf-dkim] What's a replay?

2005-08-17 06:05:08
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, John Leslie wrote:
Tony Finch <dot(_at_)dotat(_dot_)at> wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, Eric Allman wrote:

Interesting proposal, but I wonder if it's realistic.  It seems to presume
that folks have implemented CSA in the first place.  I find I can't really
evaluate that proposal well, because I frankly find it hard to read.

[ mid-conversation change of mailing list ]

   It's hard to guess the context here...

See the References: and In-Reply-To: header fields for links to the
context. In any case, it isn't relevant to the poor readability of the CSA
specification.

I agree, but I haven't succeeded with my suggested improvements to the spec.

   Perhaps you'd like to outline these improvements?

I did so over a year ago, and changes to the spec since then mean that the
suggestion is no longer useful. See my messages from 16 Jun 2004 Subject:
Re: CSV specification revision available. My suggestions were apparently
"totally unacceptable" so I lost enthusiasm for working on wording
improvements.

Message-ID: 
<Pine(_dot_)SOL(_dot_)4(_dot_)58(_dot_)0406162005030(_dot_)25488(_at_)orange(_dot_)csi(_dot_)cam(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk>
Message-ID: 
<Pine(_dot_)SOL(_dot_)4(_dot_)58(_dot_)0406162132060(_dot_)9579(_at_)yellow(_dot_)csi(_dot_)cam(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk>

Tony.
-- 
f.a.n.finch  <dot(_at_)dotat(_dot_)at>  http://dotat.at/
BISCAY: WEST 5 OR 6 BECOMING VARIABLE 3 OR 4. SHOWERS AT FIRST. MODERATE OR
GOOD.
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>