On Mon, May 11, 2026 at 10:21 PM Murray S. Kucherawy <[email protected]>
wrote:

> A piece of feedback about this, now that I've done a first shot at the
> minutes from the last interim:
>
> On Fri, May 8, 2026 at 1:09 PM Murray S. Kucherawy <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> * draft-chuang-dkim2-dns will get a Call For Adoption as discussed.
>>
>
> Is there actually enough to say here that a separate document is warranted?
>

The theory here is that the DNS record specification is mostly copied
verbatim from RFC6376 with a few updates for DKIM2 that make it unsuitable
for just normatively referencing RFC6376.  Yet, the DNS record
specification will be more stable than the draft-ietf-dkim-dkim2-spec part
of the DKIM2 specification; hence, it should be separate.   That said, I'm
okay with merging them if that's what the WG wants.
-Wei
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to