On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 07:46:42 +0100, Barry Leiba
<barryleiba(_at_)computer(_dot_)org>
wrote:
There are only two significant changes between -01 and -02 ... most of
the changes are just updating the references. The substantive changes
are:
1. The addition of the paragraph that begins "Similarly, a message
that is not compliant with RFC5322," near the end of 5.3.
Which is a start, but not nearly enough.
2. The addition of 8.14.
Which also is a start, but not nearly enough.
For the record, I am totall OPPOSED to this WGLC unless and until there is
adequate normative wording to cover these loopholes (and the current
change to 5.3 is not "adequate").
--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131
Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clerew(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html