Jim Fenton wrote:
Thoughts?
Close the ticket as soon as *FWS is replaced by either
*WSP or [FWS]. Maybe add text in the direction of...
| [FWS] is expected to be replaced by *SP or similar
| in a future update of [RFC4871].
...for the [FWS] variant. The TAB in *WSP is also not
more state of the art (as documented in RFC 5198), so
maybe 4871bis will pick *SP after/if FWS failed in the
implementation and interop tests for a draft standard.
Frank
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html