Hi Barry, At 15:16 18-10-2009, Barry Leiba wrote: >As Stephen says, the intent has always been to roll 5671 into 4871. >That was one reason we wanted to get 5672 done as quickly as possible, >so that the six-month timer wouldn't get in our way. By the time >we're ready to have 4871bis out as DS, if that's what we decide to do, >the text in 5672 will be mature enough to include in it. I will >re-word that bullet to say "4871 + 5672".
Thanks, that clarifies the goal for DKIM-base. >Are you saying that you can't support a charter that even has the >working group *consider* DS for ADSP? I am not objecting to the Working Group considering DS for ADSP or to any of the text in the charter update. Regards, -sm _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
