ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1399: clarify i= vs. SSP

2007-12-09 13:48:50

Dave,

Now that you've raised a bunch of issues, (thanks for that) we'll
see whether or not we get an overall rough consensus as those are
considered.

I've an open mind on how that might go, but we're not starting
from scratch here - we do have rfc 5016 and a couple of years
background, so achieving that consensus is quite possible.

Stephen.

Dave Crocker wrote:
Stephen,

Stephen Farrell wrote:
At the meeting last week we said we wanted to try get issue
1399 [1] resolved before Jim sends out a version of SSP to
start WGLC.

You are implying that you still think the document is quite close to
working group last call.  Is this correct?

Last Call is issued when there appears to be a stable consensus that the
document is finished.

Is the intent, then, to ignore that fundamental issues that have been
raised about its current form?

d/
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html