On 15/Sep/10 01:04, John R. Levine wrote: > For all the claims that checking transitive trust is important [...] > > Having said all that, it remains perfectly reasonable to write up any > of these hypothetical propsals as I-Ds and ask the group to publish > them as Experimental RFCs, to provide a public spec for anyone > interested in implementing them, something I'd support. If it turns > out people do implement them and find them useful, we can revisit them > and consider them for standards track, as they're doing in EAI. > > So start writing those I-Ds. It's even kind of fun, writing down your > ideas and trying to make them so clear that even someone like me won't > misunderstand them.
Ok, done. Will you then say what you think about it? Filename: draft-vesely-dkim-joint-sigs Revision: 00 Title: DKIM Joint Signatures Creation_date: 2010-09-15 WG ID: Independent Submission Number_of_pages: 5 Abstract: DKIM Joint Signatures provides a means to limit the responsibility of a message that implied by signing it, and possibly transfer the responsibility to a third party. http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-vesely-dkim-joint-sigs-00.txt _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
