On August 11, 2005 at 14:55, Michael Thomas wrote:
I think things can be clearer, and the restructuring of the
document to clearly separate components can be done. I have made
suggestions on what can be done in past posts (to ietf-mailsig),
but failed to get any feedback that the suggestions were useful.
As somebody who's done protocol development, the more
documents you need to reference, the more things suck.
IPsec and IKE are a great example.
As I noted already, separate documents are not required, and
my first comments did not even mention it.
Separate documents do provide a clearer separation of components,
but yes, it must be weighed against the manageability of having
multiple documents.
The signing and canonicalization process can be specified independent
of key management components. The current DKIM draft interleaves
all of this throughout, when it does not need to be. A simple
restructuring of the document can fix this problem.
--ewh
_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim