SM wrote: >>> The working group is now ready to switch its focus to refining and >>> advancing the DKIM protocols. The current deliverables for the >>> DKIM working group are these: >>> >>> * Advance the base DKIM protocol (RFC 4871) to Draft Standard. > > The base DKIM protocol is updated by RFC 5672. In my opinion RFC > 4871 cannot be advanced to Draft Standard status without RFC 5672.
Yes. The intent as I understand it is not to declare 4871 as DS but to write a 4871bis draft that folds in the changes from 5672. S. > >>> * Collect data on the deployment and interoperability of the >>> Author Domain Signing Practices protocol (RFC 5617), and >>> determine if/when it's ready to advance on the standards track. >>> Update it at Proposed Standard or advance it to Draft Standard, >>> as appropriate. > > I cannot support advancing RFC 5617 to Draft Standard. The message > posted by one of the WG Chairs at > http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2009q4/012747.html summarizes > why I don't think that it is useful to have the discussion. > > Regards, > -sm > > _______________________________________________ > 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
