On Sat 18/Aug/2018 23:45:40 +0200 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>
> OpenDKIM still implements RFC6651 and finds it useful for debugging
> problems with new implementations, so at least from that perspective I
> don't think historical status for it is warranted. If an update is needed
> to cover the issues raised here, that's possibly worth pursuing.
The difference w.r.t. DMARC is that it is the signer, not necessarily the
author's domain owner, who gets the report. So, yes, rfc6651 has its own
worthiness. The part related to ADSP, however, deserves to be demoted to
Historic.
IMHO, updating rfc665{1,2} should be done after rfc7489bis, moving the format
definitions to the latter spec, for the reasons explained in my previous
message.
Best
Ale
--
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim
