>Here's the proposal that Barry just announced, for splitting the DKIM >specification into a DKIM-specific portion and an underlying, more generic >portion that could be re-purposed for other services. It's current working >acronym is DOSETA.
Seems reasonable to me, both the split, and the plan to reorganize. As it stands, 4871 suffers from too much history, and as a result contains a great deal of stuff that has nothing to do with implementing the protocol. I would, for example, get rid of everything about MUAs beyond mentioning the bare facts that MUAs can do DKIM signing and verification. We should be able to produce docs that are both clearer and shorter. R's, John _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
