ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-rfc4871bis

2010-09-23 12:23:10
Jeff,

Thanks...

On 9/22/2010 12:18 PM, Jeff Macdonald wrote:
Section 3.9:

INFORMATIVE DISCUSSION: This document does not require the value      
of the SDID or AUID to match the identifier in any other message      
header field.

should "the identifier" be "an identifier"?

pretty subtle, but yeah, more precise/accurate.


I cringed at SDID and AUID, but I don't have any better suggestions at
the moment.

Reviewing the flow of the document, I suggest moving section 2.7-2.11
to be after section 2.2.

well, that's a pretty thoughtful suggestion...

To make sure I understand the intent:  move the set of subsections that 
introduce higher-level constructs, to come before the sub-sections that define 
syntactic elements?

Sounds like an improvement to me.

d/

-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html