> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:ietf-dkim- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Dave CROCKER > Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 7:06 AM > To: DKIM IETF WG > Subject: [ietf-dkim] Splitting the mailing list document? > > I think I saw 3 different topics, and that there has already been > a bit of > discussion about this. The topics are: > > a. Handling DKIM messages transiting a Mailing List Manager > > b. Trust-based enhancements for Mailing List Managers based on > DKIM > > c. Best practices for Mailing List Managers > [...] > > 2. If a split is appropriate, how should the existing content be > divided? > > I vote for letting Murray handle this. (You're welcome, Murray.) > > So, the first question is intended to get some working group consensus, > before > Murray puts in the effort of dividing things up.
Ah, the deafening silence... After thinking about it for a while, I believe it would be fine to fork the document as described. Given the working group's scope and charter, and in the absence of any objection, I propose the following: 1) The current document covers what you have as (a) above with no change to name, and an intended status change to BCP. 2) The parts of the current document suggesting possible enhancements become a new WG document with a similar name. The status of this document would be Informational. 3) A general BCP for lists irrespective of DKIM is probably something the email world should have. I'd be fine with this being either Informational or BCP status. I would take this up as an individual submission and probably move it through the APPS area, but I would really like to hear from some of the MLM maintainers, past and present, on this list willing to help with that work before I agree to add it to my queue. None of this will happen before the start of September in any case, but I thought I should finally reply to this. -MSK _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
