Jim Fenton wrote: > Thoughts? Close the ticket as soon as *FWS is replaced by either *WSP or [FWS]. Maybe add text in the direction of...
| [FWS] is expected to be replaced by *SP or similar | in a future update of [RFC4871]. ...for the [FWS] variant. The TAB in *WSP is also not more state of the art (as documented in RFC 5198), so maybe 4871bis will pick *SP after/if FWS failed in the implementation and interop tests for a draft standard. Frank _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
