> On 25 Apr 2016, at 20:37, Leif Johansson <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2016-04-25 15:29, Brotman, Alexander wrote: >> Hello, >> >> We've incorporated much of the feedback we've received from the community, >> and would like to present updated drafts. >> >> * One of the most evident changes is that we've split the draft into two >> separate documents; one for the STS policy, and one for the TLS reporting. >> These are meant to replace the original SMTP STS draft >> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-margolis-smtp-sts-00). >> * We've altered the name a bit from "SMTP STS" to "MTA STS" to be more in >> line with DEEP, and have also added elements for the DEEP registry. >> * After some deliberation amongst the authors, we've also decided to remove >> the DNSSEC-related options for the STS policy, which should simplify work >> for those wishing to deploy STS validation. >> * Within the TLS reporting, we've explicitly mentioned several failure >> modes, including those specifically relating to DANE and MTA STS. >> * We've also altered the report syntax to use JSON instead of XML. >> > > Thanks, > > In BA there was consensus (pretty strong at that) to adopt this draft as > a WG document. > > This starts an adoption call for adoption as a WG document. Please > indicate your support or objection (with motivation) for WG adoption > no later than EOB (any TZ) May 1st
I support adoption of these drafts as WG documents, they will need some further work though. I'm of course reviewing and will provide feedback both on list and have been talking with (some of) the authors backchannel as well. Aaron
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Uta mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
