Thanks for going through the list Jim.

So let's say that if there's no objection before the end
of the DKIM session in Philly, that we'll close the issues
as suggested by Jim.

I guess that also means that for the meeting we should focus
on the issues not listed below and those from the list below
that don't end up being closed.

Stephen.

Jim Fenton wrote:
> I'd like to shorten the list of open issues, so I'll start with the 
> issues that I consider clearly moot in the ASP draft (-ssp-03) or that 
> are duplicates of other issues.  Hopefully these are non-controversial.
> 
> WG chairs, I'd like to ask that you direct the closure of the following 
> issues, subject to WG consensus, of course:
> 
> 
>> 1399    clarify i= vs. SSP
> 
> Duplicate of 1519.
> 
>> 1402    Applicability of SSP to subdomains
> 
> Duplicate of 1534.
> 
>> 1512    ssp should not link "all" and third parties
> 
> SSP-03 does not have any linkage to third-party signatures
> 
>> 1525    Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics
> 
> SSP-03 puts no special emphasis on the first Author Address
> 
>> 1529    Change "originator" to "author"
> 
> "originator" is not used any more.
> 
>> 1530    replace use of term "suspicious"
> 
> New draft does not use the term.
> 
>> 1531    "does not exist"
> 
> The wording has changed slightly from "does not exist" to "does not 
> exist in DNS", which I think answers this.
> 
>> 1532    revise list labeling
> 
> The referenced text isn't in the draft any more.
> 
>> 1533    strict vs. integrated
> 
> Neither term is used.
> 
> 
>> 1535    Simplify SSP decision tree
> 
> It's a whole lot simpler now (and arguably, not even a "Decision tree" 
> but instead a "lookup tree")
> 
>>        
>> 1536    definition of action terms
> 
> Neither "reject" nor "bounce" appears in the draft any more.
> 
>> 1537    Reputation is out of scope or define it
> 
> The word "reputation" does not appear in the draft.
> 
>>  
>> 1538    review and repair of normative vocabulary usage
> 
> The use of normative vocabulary has changed so extensively that if 
> there's a problem now, it's should be a new issue.
> 
>> 1540    deprecate t=testing 
> 
> t=testing is gone.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
> 
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

Reply via email to