Hector Santos wrote:
Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
Hector stated:
I think this message by Barry in March 2009 summarizing a conference
call between Pasi, Stephen and Barry nicely captures the upper/lower
layers, ADSP, i= and outputs conflicts that continue today:
http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2009q1/011314.html
I think that message doesn't say a single thing about layers.
It looks entirely procedural to me.
Darn it. I copied the wrong link and now I can't find it. :(
Let me search again...... Quick search failed. I'll search deeper
later if you still want me to. I will find it at some point just to
have it in my DKIM notes.
Here is the correct message link:
Status and direction
http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2009q1/011194.html
For all and intent and purposes, this message can be reposted today
and still bee relevant, covering the final issues we are still dealing
with. Note the chairs recommended move forward items, in particular
#4 which is what I believe we are trying to help with in this WGLC:
4. *Aim 4871bis at incorporating what we've learned since 4871.*
If that results in a document that can and should move to
Draft Standard, we'll do that. If it does not, then 4871bis
will go to Proposed Standard, and it will take another
round of work to move up the standards track.
--
Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html