On 5/13/2011 12:15 AM, SM wrote:
Although one can extrapolate from experience and provide some
guidance, I would not call it Best Current Practices. I suggest a
change to that sentence:
Based on deployment experience with DKIM, this document provides
guidance for the use of DKIM
Nothing in the definition of BCPs require that it be limited to
covering existing practice.
Well, other than the naive assumption that something called a Best
Current Practices would in fact document best current practices.
But since this argument seems to be all about proving that we've
At 11:03 23-05-2011, Dave CROCKER wrote:
Then you are using criteria that go beyond the requirements of a BCP.
From RFC 2026:
5. BEST CURRENT PRACTICE (BCP) RFCs
The BCP subseries of the RFC series is designed to be a way to
standardize practices and the results of
Dave CROCKER wrote:
? In Section 5.8:
DKIM-aware authoring MLMs MUST sign the mail they send according to
the regular signing guidelines given in [DKIM].
One concern is that having an MLM apply its signature to unsigned
mail might cause some verifiers or receivers to interpret
2. Should this be Informational or BCP?
a: BCP, making it clear when we're insufficiently certain about
something.
Last Call will sort out any objections.
Well, I couldn't afford to go, so I can't say you're wrong, and I don't
know why I didn't see that on the list.
I
As chair, I can say that consensus was to make this normative, not experimental.
With the best will in the world, I was there, and I saw no such consensus.
The closest thing I can find in a quick search of the archive is this
note, which says that the group agreed on one thing (that lists
As chair, I can say that consensus was to make this normative, not
experimental.
With the best will in the world, I was there, and I saw no such consensus.
We discussed it live at IETF 80, and I posted the following minutes to
the mailing list on 28 March:
3. Discussion of mailinglists
2. Should this be Informational or BCP?
a: BCP, making it clear when we're insufficiently certain about something.
Last Call will sort out any objections.
Well, I couldn't afford to go, so I can't say you're wrong, and I don't
know why I didn't see that on the list.
I guess on
There's no need to change the current language. RFCs have been referring
to cron jobs since 1997.
Actually since 1991, see below
jaap
% cd ~/library/rfc-editor/in-notes
% grep -w cron *
rfc1244.txt:- Checks all commands in the /etc/rc files and cron
On May 15, 2011, at 9:42 PM, Barry Leiba wrote:
The author can be a human using an MUA (Mail User Agent) or
an automated mail robot with an MTA.
I don't see that automated mail robot with an MTA is right at all.
But I see what you're getting at, and I'd support a change such as
-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of J.D.
Falk
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 5:35 AM
To: IETF list; DKIM List
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Last Call: draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists-10.txt
(DKIM And Mailing Lists) to BCP
I don't see
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Hector Santos
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2011 5:00 PM
To: ietf-d...@mipassoc.org
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Last Call: draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists-10.txt
I think it's best to have an example. cron seems to be an ideal one, though I'd be happy to add
a second, Windows-specific, example if there is one. If not, changing 'such as cron' to 'such as
the cron UNIX utility' seems a better change to me.
Anyone who's ever managed a Unix or linux
What is cron? and how does it interface with the originator defined as
the MSA? is cron an MTA or MUA?
...
It was a rhetorical question. I don't think its necessary and IMO,
unprecedented.
I'd be very surprised to find that mention of cron in an RFC is
unprecedented. Maybe I'll download
I'd be very surprised to find that mention of cron in an RFC is
unprecedented. Maybe I'll download the RFC set, have Google do a
word index on it, and see.
RFCs 2123, 2839, 4833, and 5427 refer to cron and cron jobs. There may be
others, but I found those with a simple grep. (If anyone was
Hi Murray,
At 11:17 13-05-2011, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
By my read, the bulk of your comments fall into these categories:
(1) Remove the normative language, publish as Informational
As I said to John, I'd be fine with this. The document started out
as Informational but there was working
: draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists-10.txt
(DKIM And Mailing Lists) to BCP
Ideally, if Murray wishes to support Jeff McDonald's Anti-Spam ID that
is intended to update RFC3463, he might use (since this is all new
anyway):
554 5.8.0 Undefined Policy detail
554 5.8.1 Message refused
17 matches
Mail list logo
