Sorry for the delay. Top level, I agree that this draft tightens up the
details in a beneficial way, and the working group ought to work off the
crocker version. I'm happy to also merge this version in my
problem-statement draft also.
My interpretation of the changes, is that the crocker draft
Steffen Nurpmeso wrote in
<20230310002254.3yxyh%stef...@sdaoden.eu>:
|Steffen Nurpmeso wrote in
| <20230309221555.or-j9%stef...@sdaoden.eu>:
...
||one could add one entry for each, with the necessity to cover all
||of these in the signature. Then receivers could check all in turn
...
|Of
Steffen Nurpmeso wrote in
<20230309221555.or-j9%stef...@sdaoden.eu>:
...
|one could add one entry for each, with the necessity to cover all
|of these in the signature. Then receivers could check all in turn
|and pick one matching. ([Of course] The values of all those
Of course this is
Dave Crocker wrote in
<6a11d9c6-21aa-872d-a0ce-53420769f...@dcrocker.net>:
|Name: draft-crocker-dkim-replay
"mighty" surely means "might".
In 2.2 "Outbound filtering" -> "Outbound filtering:".
Items in 4. have no final punctuation but the last.
Vice versa in first list of 5.
No final
On 3/9/2023 7:04 AM, Tim Wicinski wrote:
it would be useful to the working group if the authors
could perhaps summarize the differences between them.
As I noted, mine is a revision of Wei's. (And I have been among the
contributors to his, for some months.) If adopted, the author list needs
Dave
Thanks for publishing this. So we (as the working group) have two problem
statement drafts to read and consider.
Wonderful!
I'm going to do my reading of both (as I hope all will), but it would be
useful to the working group if the authors
could perhaps summarize the differences between
FYI:
[NOTE:] This draft is based on the Problem Statement developed by
Wei Chuan and others (including me) over some months. This
version is offered as a refinement of that draft, with a
tighter focus. Rather than being a 'separate' document, it
should be
