Jim Fenton wrote:
Dave CROCKER wrote:
Are there other changes to draft-ietf-dkim-rfc4871-errata being proposed?
I believe the Chairs requested that the other, non-controversial, errata
be incorporated into this draft.
I think we suggested it as an option rather than requested.
Is that (editorial) work ongoing?
I think it'd be great if Dave were willing to do that, but I could
understand if he'd rather not.
S.
-Jim
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html