[ietf-dkim] more on discardable, was Lists "BCP" draft
Murray S. Kucherawy
msk at cloudmark.com
Mon Jun 7 03:16:12 PDT 2010
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-dkim-bounces at mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-
> bounces at mipassoc.org] On Behalf Of Brett McDowell
> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 2:59 AM
> To: Roland Turner
> Cc: DKIM List
> Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] more on discardable, was Lists "BCP" draft
> > I'd strengthen #3 with unrelated harm/breakage/errors should not
> > from participating stakeholders behaving conservatively.
> > - Roland
> Why not simply clarify this in the currently underway DKIM-BCP? Then
> we don't have to have the caveat in our three guiding principles. Our
> principles will assume all stakeholders (participating in
> authentication or not) are reading and following our BCP guidance. Is
> that a fair position for us to take?
Can one of you suggest some specific edits to the current draft's text to move us in that direction? Or are we already there with the current text?
More information about the ietf-dkim