Re: [ietf-dkim] Ticket #10: public key example -- no change needed

Rolf E. Sonneveld wrote:

> -1. I suggest to add clarifications etc. to a future update of RFC5863 
> (deployment and operations document).
So you agree clarification is required but not for RFC4871bis?

Interesting. Lets see:

1) A few words clarification for DKIM-BASE standard. A little
    confusion for Windows people and domains using
    ISP managed DNS zones.

versus

2) Add new section in RFC5863 to match Create/Publish examples
    hopefully covering all bases.  Hope, Maybe?

-- 
HLS


_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html