ietf-mailsig
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: revised Proposed Charter

2005-07-22 15:29:40

A related issue is that many DKIM deployments will
need some way of communicating results downstream,
and draft-kucherawy-sender-auth-header doesn't have
another WG home.  But perhaps that's not such a good
idea.  How do others feel about this paragraph of the
charter?

I'm in favor of retaining this in the charter if at all possible because we need more minds helping and looking at the A/R idea and there's no other place for us supporters to go. I understand there are potential difficulties and it's not an essential DKIM requirement, but please, let me beg and hopefully it will work :) I have no argument for why A/R is essential to the core document. I can only assert that documenting the results seems logical and sort-of common sense. If you buy into that, then some mechanism is required and A/R is already in use by all the existing deployments and we are all hungry for your help in perfecting it.

Also, I like the term "document" the results rather than "communicate" the results. The former doesn't carry the two-way understanding implied by the latter.

--
Arvel




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>