Barry Leiba wrote:
> This is the promised seed for 4871bis discussion. Is the group ready
> to move ahead with that? Is the DKIM signing protocol ready to go to
> Draft Standard? Is there an update needed, with another cycle at
> Proposed Standard? Is there energy in the group to follow a 4871bis
> effort through?
1) Another Proposed Standard Cycle: -1; nothing to be gained, much to lose.
2) Draft Standard: -.1: not sure what we have to gain other than an IETF process
Gold Star that nobody outside of the IETF standards potato world understands
As far as I can tell, DKIM deployment is going along just fine without any
further help from the IETF. Why risk screwing up a good thing?
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
