On 08/30/2010 11:03 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
I’d like some help tackling the next version of the MLM draft. People
seem to have varying ideas about what should be removed and perhaps
appear in other documents now. I need some consensus on a direction in
which to proceed.
So can I please get some +1s/-1s on each of the following:
(1) Split the document into three documents: A DKIM MLM BCP that
discusses signing and verifying in the context of MLMs with no value-add
items addressed, a DKIM MLM Informational that discusses possible
value-add enhancements to MLMs in the DKIM world, and a non-WG BCP about
mailing lists irrespective of DKIM (Dave’s proposal);
-1. Multiple documents just confuse issues, and are a giant pain to
deal with.
(2) Tear out everything having to do with making author signatures
survive list relaying, dropping all that text altogether, and instead
pointing people at S/MIME or PGP (John’s proposal);
-1. S/MIME and PGP aren't even vaguely related to DKIM, and we're not in
any position to know whether S/MIME or PGP are better. We should just
state the facts and leave it that.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html