[ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM BOF -- draft charter and agenda

[Dave Crocker]

>
>
> Several people pointed out the problem in that, and we changed it to 
> the current
> > * Additional key management protocols or infrastructure.
>
> I think it's fine as it currently is, yes?  I don't think it needs

If I am understanding the issue correctly, then yes, 'additional' should 
be sufficient:

     The working group effort is based on a specification that provides 
a key query service.  No *additional* ones need to be explored in this 
round of effort.

d/