Folks, Question to the working group...
DKIM Chair wrote: > To those who voted against draft-ietf-dkim-rfc4871-errata: given, now, that > we > will be using draft-ietf-dkim-rfc4871-errata to move forward, and the other > choices are off the table, can you accept draft-ietf-dkim-rfc4871-errata as > written? If not, will you post specific changes, in OLD/NEW format, that > would > make it acceptable to you? Unless I've missed or misread other postings, the only item lodged, so far, has been Jim Fenton's suggest that the UAID acronym be replaced, and discussion about that is proceeding. Are there other changes to draft-ietf-dkim-rfc4871-errata being proposed? d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
