ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] why we should clearly specify domain existence

2008-05-27 09:26:30
Tony Finch wrote:

It's also the definition of result "nxdomain" in Murray's draft,
if you want "nomailfqdn" (or a similar name), where NXDOMAIN is
only a proper subset, it's okay.
 
What's the filename of that draft?

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kucherawy-sender-auth-header-14#section-2.4.2

it's backwards to complain that we can't fix the semantics 
because they will no longer match the semantics we are trying
to fix.

ACK, I didn't get that you want new precise semantics with a
new corresponding name.  

 Frank

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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>