(d).  My suggested changes to Eliot's proposal are at
http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2009q1/011153.html

-Jim

Stephen Farrell wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> We've had some recent discussion about d=/i= on the list
> and a couple of concrete proposals for clarifications to
> make to RFC 4871.
>    - The first is Dave's erratum I-D. [1]
>    - The second is a proposal from Eliot.[2]
>
>   
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

Reply via email to