[ietf-dkim] We need a BCP
chl at clerew.man.ac.uk
Mon May 5 02:29:23 PDT 2008
On Fri, 02 May 2008 13:02:10 +0100, Eliot Lear <lear at cisco.com> wrote:
> Charles Lindsey wrote:
>> Fine! Then let us write a BCP.
> No. The more documents people need to read to understand the mail
> system, the more difficult it is to implement and deploy.
Fine! Then adopt my second suggestion, which was to make the BCP a clearly
designated section within the ADSP document.
> ... Let us help
> those who actually are trying to implement this stuff to do the right
> thing. Especially when we know omitting the check would be precisely
> the wrong thing.
Exactly, so write it all as a BCP section, as I suggested. It cannot be
100% normative because we have no means of REQUIRING Verifiers to behave
in any particular way, or even to Verify at all. But we can make it very
clear just what they are _expected_ to do.
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131
Email: chl at clerew.man.ac.uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5
More information about the ietf-dkim