Re: [ietf-dkim] Consensus call on d=/i= clarification

(a) The erratum I-D [1] is ready to go. Process it.

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

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
[ietf-dkim] Errata, (continued) [ietf-dkim] Errata, Dave CROCKER Re: [ietf-dkim] Errata, Eliot Lear Re: [ietf-dkim] Errata, Dave CROCKER Re: [ietf-dkim] Errata, Michael Thomas Message not available Re: [ietf-dkim] Errata, Dave CROCKER Re: [ietf-dkim] Errata, Michael Thomas Re: [ietf-dkim] Errata, SM Message not available Re: [ietf-dkim] Errata, Michael Thomas Re: [ietf-dkim] Consensus call on d=/i= clarification, John Levine Re: [ietf-dkim] Consensus call on d=/i= clarification, Steve Atkins Re: [ietf-dkim] Consensus call on d=/i= clarification, Chris Lewis <=

Previous by Date:	Re: [ietf-dkim] Errata, Dave CROCKER
Next by Date:	Re: [ietf-dkim] Errata, Michael Thomas
Previous by Thread:	Re: [ietf-dkim] Consensus call on d=/i= clarification, Steve Atkins
Next by Thread:	[ietf-dkim] DKIM WG meeting on the agenda, Murray S. Kucherawy
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]