On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 1:17 PM, John Levine <[email protected]> wrote:
> Here's a draft that puts the forwarding thing into DKIM, with the > dread version bump. It defines a general syntax for conditional > signatures, with the forwarding signature the only condition defined > so far. (Since you asked, new conditions don't need another version > bump.) > I'm uneasy with an increase in version that isn't done in a complete replacement for RFC6376. We're not just registering a couple of new extension tags here. I would prefer that, if we do go decide to go down this route, we crack it open and do a proper revision document rather than just describing v2 in terms of "changes since v1". I also wonder where/how/if this would fit inside a potential DMARC charter, or if we're looking at a second WG for this, or what. -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
