I did suggest this at MAAWG - adding that part of this interop workshop should be between different ISP and/or corporate mailserver implementations of DKIM
This is so that the interop between in-production DKIM systems can be tested, This is in addition to testing the interop between the various MTA reference implementations (an iteration of which was already done some time back) On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Ian Eiloart <[email protected]> wrote: >> Typically, an interoperability survey is required to go to draft. >> Considering that you may wish to reverse the order a bit. > > If that's the case (being new, I don't know whether it is or not), then > should the wording be modified to make the interoperability survey a higher > priority than item 1? That is: the dependencies should be done first, or at > least made explicit in the charter. -- Suresh Ramasubramanian ([email protected]) _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
