On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 12:44:29PM -0800, Eric Allman allegedly wrote: > The i-d draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 has been published. This is the > follow-on to draft-allman-dkim-base-01. > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dkim-base-00.txt
And a belated "Thank You" to Eric. Like most WGs, there seems to be a posse of "G"as-baggers (such as myself) and a tiny minority who actually do useful "W"ork. Eric has clearly put in a lot of hard and thankless yards to get us to, what I think is, an advanced and professional specification. For those who are new to this list, the -00 designation could be mis-construed as new, untested, unstable etc. Nothing could be further from the truth. In terms of stability, a more accurate designation is more along the lines of an -05 or -06. Mark. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://dkim.org/ietf-list-rules.html
