Jim Fenton wrote:
Hmm -- back in IETF73 we seemed to agree (at least according to the
email below) that guessing is, while probably not a good idea,
possibly less bad than the alternative:
http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2008q4/010820.html
Hmm, that's right; I had forgotten completely about that. However,
errata 1532 still shows up as "reported"; that means it still needs to
be acted on, right? I'm still not entirely clear on the process for
errata.
I had also completely forgotten that email, and found it only
earlier today! (so my email last week wasn't quite right).
The ball got dropped back in 2008, so yes, errata 1532 still
needs to be acted on. Given that we now have the dkim-deployment
document ready (which has the recommendations for e.g. DomainKeys
deployers), we probably want to edit the errata text slightly
(at the very least, add a pointer to dkim-deployment) before
marking it as "verified".
Best regards,
Pasi
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html