Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6376 (4810)

I had formulated the errata as a quick patch, along the
same lines of had been done elsewhere.  It’s so good to
feel understood! :)


On a bit of a side note, I wonder how much appetite there
is for a document update?  Besides this, we have no way to
include non-ASCII UTF-8 local parts in i=.

.. Juan


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