Re: [ietf-dkim] errata revision: Assessor

ietf-dkim

2009-03-25 22:02:23

I am +1 for this.   Let's leave stuff beyond the SDID 'opaque'

My logic: what the assessor consumes beyond the SDID is outside the
scope of the spec.


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

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: [ietf-dkim] what is a standard, was errata revision: Assessor, (continued) Re: [ietf-dkim] what is a standard, was errata revision: Assessor, Eliot Lear Re: [ietf-dkim] what is a standard, was errata revision: Assessor, Dave CROCKER Re: [ietf-dkim] what is a standard, was errata revision: Assessor, Hector Santos Re: [ietf-dkim] what is a standard, was errata revision: Assessor, J.D. Falk Re: [ietf-dkim] errata revision: Assessor, Murray S. Kucherawy Re: [ietf-dkim] errata revision: Assessor, J.D. Falk Re: [ietf-dkim] errata revision: Assessor, Wietse Venema Re: [ietf-dkim] errata revision: Assessor, Siegel, Ellen Re: [ietf-dkim] errata revision: Assessor, Barry Leiba Re: [ietf-dkim] errata revision: Assessor, Jim Fenton Re: [ietf-dkim] errata revision: Assessor, Suresh Ramasubramanian <= Re: [ietf-dkim] errata revision: Assessor, Jeff Macdonald

Previous by Date:	Re: [ietf-dkim] errata revision: opaque, Suresh Ramasubramanian
Next by Date:	Re: [ietf-dkim] errata revision: Identity Assessor vs. Message Filtering engine, Suresh Ramasubramanian
Previous by Thread:	Re: [ietf-dkim] errata revision: Assessor, Jim Fenton
Next by Thread:	Re: [ietf-dkim] errata revision: Assessor, Jeff Macdonald
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]