Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted

ietf-dkim

2007-01-22 12:40:11

At 10:50 AM +0000 1/22/07, Charles Lindsey wrote:

What is not clear is WHY this alternative was chosen (as opposed toletting it result in an empty <body>).

Again: it doesn't matter why A or B was chosen. What is important isthat we have a spec without interoperability issues.


--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Domain Assurance Council
_______________________________________________

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

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted, (continued) Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted, Charles Lindsey Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted, Hector Santos Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted, Hector Santos Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted, Charles Lindsey [ietf-dkim] Issue: Section 8.1 Misuse Of Body Limit - Needs some Insight here!, Hector Santos Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue: Section 8.1 Misuse Of Body Limit - Needs some Insight here!, Jim Fenton Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted, Eric Allman Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted, Hector Santos Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted, Charles Lindsey Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted, Hector Santos Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted, Paul Hoffman <= RE: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted, Bill.Oxley

Previous by Date:	Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted, Eric Allman
Next by Date:	Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted, Charles Lindsey
Previous by Thread:	Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted, Hector Santos
Next by Thread:	RE: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted, Bill.Oxley
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]