Barry Leiba wrote: > In response to Dave's long note, I think there are (at least) two > major issues that we need to separate: > > 1. How to move forward and declare working group rough consensus on > the errata draft. > > 2. Why, specifically, Pasi thinks the "errata" draft requires fresh > IETF rough consensus. > > I'm going to split these into two new threads; messages forthcoming. >
Not sure if you see this as worthy, but there was a few things he said that was troublesome, namely: ASDP using d= only. This will not allow for no-signature "i always sign" DKIM=ALL or DKIM=DISCARDABLE policy. In other words, ADSP only applicable when is a VALID signature. A fundamental change neither of the above options address. -- Sincerely Hector Santos http://www.santronics.com _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html