So I've just requested a 1.5 hour slot for Prague. If we figure
we don't need it we can cancel out later.
Stephen.
On 21/01/11 18:50, Eliot Lear wrote:
Barry,
I'd suggest that the group is in one of two states:
* We are sufficiently agreed on 4871bis that it can advance, at
which point I would ask that we circle back to the DOSETA split,
and how it relates to other work, and what opportunities there
are. I think Dave really posed an interesting idea, and what it
needs is a good test case. If we can identify that, then I would
say we should meet on that point, and consider this from a
re-charter perspective.
* If we are not concluded on 4871bis, then we should meet to close
on open issues.
Thanks,
Eliot
On 1/20/11 10:32 PM, Barry Leiba wrote:
Does the DKIM working group think it needs a face-to-face meeting in
Prague, at IETF 81?
I think we do not, though that answer may depend upon whether 4871bis
is ready or needs more discussion, and whether we think we need
discussion about the mailing lists document (which Murray has
patiently been holding off on, while we sort out 4871bis).
Comments?
Barry, as chair
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html