Barry Leiba wrote:
In response to Dave's long note, I think there are (at least) two
major issues that we need to separate:
1. How to move forward and declare working group rough consensus on
the errata draft.
2. Why, specifically, Pasi thinks the "errata" draft requires fresh
IETF rough consensus.
I'm going to split these into two new threads; messages forthcoming.
Not sure if you see this as worthy, but there was a few things he said
that was troublesome, namely:
ASDP using d= only.
This will not allow for no-signature "i always sign" DKIM=ALL or
DKIM=DISCARDABLE policy.
In other words, ADSP only applicable when is a VALID signature.
A fundamental change neither of the above options address.
--
Sincerely
Hector Santos
http://www.santronics.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html