> -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org] > On Behalf Of Barry Leiba > Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 3:46 PM > To: IETF DKIM WG > Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition > > Everyone, please weigh in on how you would like to see this issue > resolved. > > Perhaps: > 1. Say nothing. > 2. Use Tony's text, which is in 4871bis now. > 3. Use my text or some variant of it (and is it MUST, or SHOULD?). > 4. Something else...?
My first choice is to leave it as-is in 4871bis. The risks of the ambiguity seem slight to me, but I can see the argument for pushing for something that is very clean. Thus, my second choice is to delete 3.6.1.1 from -bis and not make any reference to interpretation of DK keys at all. -MSK _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
