Is this an errata? What is the rush? Why prevent the WG from
commenting on finalized changes? It is not clear what now represents
"agreement" or "consensus". Excluding any WG input might be overly
optimistic.
This is the "errata" draft, renamed to "Update" and processed as an
RFC, as we decided in the IETF 74 meeting. The new text has all been
agreed to on this list over the last week, in the three sub-threads
that Dave started... which is why we only need a brief check to make
sure they're OK. We're not excluding anything.
Barry
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html