[ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree

[Eliot Lear]

Dave,
> I'll repeat that distinction:  The current draft does not deal with exact-name 
> vs. sub-tree issues as an explicit point of distinction; it has bits of each 
> scattered around.  As such, the specification is, at best, confusing on the 
> distinction, nevermind incomplete on the tree construct.
>   

Can you suggest wording?

> But with respect to the working group's history of discussing this topic I'll 
> first thank Eliot for citing the recently-closed Issue.  It was quite 
> instructive to go back and read the associated mailing list thread.
>
> I strongly encourage others also to do read that thread
>   

As a matter of fact the way the issue was resolved was through Jim 
Fenton's presentation at the last IETF, and not so much through online 
discussion.  This having been said, the chair's have spoken and I won't 
delve further into why I think that issue should remain resolved.


>       <http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2006q4/006377.html>
>
> since I think it substantiates my concerns, rather than resolves them:
>
>       1. The cited thread shows a complete lack of anything one might call 
> consensus.
>   

That's because the consensus was formed at the meeting, as the minutes 
and Jim's presentation shows.  Be sure to look at those too.


Eliot