Stephen Farrell wrote:
I've copied the names of the entries below as well to help speed
that up for you.
Thanks, but I only vaguely recall what's what even with complete
titles, these issues are almost six months old.
As to the tool more generally, feel free to bring it up wherever
you think.
For now I've submitted the issue to ietf-action(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org, after all
it did work until summer 2005 when somebody messed with it.
I've no idea how many people you're asking to make a change, but
its probably a fair few so you may well have lots of fun there.
No, actually it's not funny, it's execessively annoying. With its
well-known username IETF and password IETF it's no top security site,
no reason why it should be based on new TLS features not supported
by Netscape 3.x or 4.x. These browerser are good enough to spend
real money at amazon or with paypal.
If you want to suggest/host something else for our next document
feel free to say so on the list and we'll consider it.
The "trac" Wiki used by the IESG works from my POV (= read access).
1365 SSP: typos open dkim Nobody 0
nobody(_at_)xyzzy(_dot_)claranet(_dot_)de 5 months ago 5 months
ago 5
Oops, that was the ticket I recall, where folks wanted "no mail"...
1398 (No subject) open dkim Nobody 0
lear(_at_)ofcourseimright(_dot_)com 3 months ago 3 months ago
0
...but what was that ? Checking the GMaNe search form:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.dkim/6592/match=1398
If that's the issue it was about resent mail originally from an
author claiming to use a "strict" signing policy.
Frank
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html