Colleagues,

As was discussed in the interim, the Chairs are reviewing documents that
are sitting in the datatracker attached to the WG (by name) but not yet
adopted by the working group.  We believe the following is the consensus
view of them and wanted to confirm with the list before proceeding:

* Discussion of draft-latimer-dkim2-rcpt-nd-signing petered off in
December.  There did not appear to be an appetite to pursue the mechanism
it described in the small amount of feedback that it did receive.
* The proposal in draft-moccia-dkim2-deployment-profile has seen fairly
active recent discussion.  We believe that the conclusion of that
discussion is that the working group does not wish to pursue adoption at
this time.  We consider that discussion to be closed.
* The best practices document draft-herr-dkim2-bcp will be adopted, but
parked until the working group has developed some operational experience
with the protocol to warrant and enable structured development work on this
document.
* draft-chuang-dkim2-dns will get a Call For Adoption as discussed.

There was also draft-brotman-dkim-fbl, but it is a candidate for adoption
in MAILMAINT, and accordingly we have arranged to exclude it from the
datatracker’s display for the DKIM working group.

Finally, we believe that draft-brotman-aggregate-performance-reporting
exceeds the current DKIM charter, and so will not be adopted here unless
the working group would like to expand scope to include it.  Failing that,
we suggest that MAILMAINT is a viable venue for this work as well.

Please advise if your perspective on any of these documents differs.

-MSK, for the DKIM Chair
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to