OK how about this as a plan

1) We do policy according to the view of scope currently being expressed by the 
chairs and myself.
2) You and I submit a four page ID that registers a NOMAIL policy for DKIM.
3) The group decides whether to accept the paragraph of text into the text of 
the main draft or not during the Draft phase.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hector Santos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 3:48 PM
> To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
> Cc: Michael Thomas; Scott Kitterman; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] RE: I think we can punt the hard 
> stuff as out of scope.
> 
> Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
> 
> > NOMAIL is out of scope, wildcards for signature policy are not.
> 
> Deja-vu.  NOMAIL is not out of scope in SSP and you need to 
> STOP saying 
> it.   The CONFUSING VOTE that was taking - I still don't now 
> show what 
> it meant but it was not what it would to be removed from SSP!
> 
> > There are two deployment stories we need to be able to give,
>  > one that meets 95% of needs with legacy infrastructure 
> support,  > the second that meets 100% of needs with a minor 
> incremental  > change to the legacy infrastructure.
> 
> I don't see how SSP violates this principle.
> 
> > The second of these provides a slot ready made
>  > for NOMAIL, (and for STARTTLE, PGP and SMIME if you like).
> 
> Oy vey! So then it is not out of scope as you said.
> 
> > I am meeting your set of requirements in full. I am just 
>  > not doing so in such a way that my proposal is out of scope,
>  > that is all.
> 
> Well, I would like to know who proposed this lame rule that 
> it should be 
> out of scope when it wasn't and was clearly part of all the 
> sepcs - SSP 
> and DSAP specs.
> 
> If people voted under the disquise of a general "NO MAIL" 
> concept across 
> the board, well, it is clear now this is not what they voted 
> for because 
> you are making provisions for it.
> 
> I don't understand why is so secret. I don't want a NO-MAIL 
> DKIM policy 
> to be dependent on a KLUDGED MX concept or  LMAP support.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Sincerely
> 
> Hector Santos, CTO
> http://www.santronics.com
> http://santronics.blogspot.com
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

Reply via email to