Dave CROCKER wrote:
Barry Leiba wrote:
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.
Folks,
To emphasize:
<http://dkim.org/ietf-dkim.htm#errata>
Includes a pointer to a diff file between the latest draft and the pre-vote draft.
The editing exercise was a matter of folding in the 3 circulated texts and, I
believe, the correction Ellen offered.
Nits:
Sections 6 and 7: s/semantics is/semantics are/
Section 12: s/single, Signing Domain Identifier/single Signing Domain
Identifier/
s/DKIM's mandatory delivery/DKIM's mandatory output/
s/semantics is/semantics are/
Otherwise looks fine.
What are we doing with the other errata in the queue? Are they to be
included in this update or processed as errata?
-Jim
|
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html