[ietf-dkim] SSP issues status

[Steve Atkins]

On Jan 15, 2008, at 9:15 AM, J D Falk wrote:

> Dave Crocker wrote:
>
>> So effectively the issue has changed from whether 30 days notice
>> really is required to whether what is really only 3 is somehow
>> acceptable.  (RFC2418, Section 3.1
>>
>> And no, this isn't about being a stickler about the rules.
>> It's about being inclusive.
>
> Yep...given the lack of further comment about the recurring phone  
> calls,
> I assumed they wouldn't be happening and will instead be unavailable
> during that time.
>

+1

> That's just me, though, and I'm assuming there'll be both a transcript
> and an opportunity for further comment afterwards -- right?

+1

Cheers,
   Steve