Re: [ietf-dkim] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dkim-implementation-report-03.txt

Jim Fenton <fenton@cisco.com> Mon, 11 October 2010 21:29 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-ietf-dkim-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-dkim-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B03553A6832 for <ietfarch-ietf-dkim-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 14:29:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Tffj3eJW6lEt for <ietfarch-ietf-dkim-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 14:28:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70CB83A6B95 for <ietf-dkim-archive@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 14:28:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [127.0.0.1]) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o9BLTF6e020955; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 14:29:21 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=mipassoc.org; s=k00001; t=1286832562; bh=RRncaYMr4PJ6FFc9dtqAGJ/IOyg=; h=Message-ID:Date: From:MIME-Version:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Sender; b=Rdn+8tLh3UNhgjPRz io69De7t4O7UN5Icm14qmT5x3mwT4v3DTUElJI7Z+NnzzPErpDsIFfnPc76uTjWwdey pS2ETZHJYsZSn1KreJ6DXuTzGMWYHGuCrkux9T6h/p62EzCEKV74ftXfgAtdNKYL0oT RPvoNEsQ4ne4O2VvMtnc=
Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o9BLT9o6020945 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 14:29:14 -0700
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhcFADUUs0yrR7Hu/2dsb2JhbACUEo18cadBnGeFSASEUoVv
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.57,316,1283731200"; d="scan'208";a="602426729"
Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com ([171.71.177.238]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Oct 2010 20:45:52 +0000
Received: from dhcp-171-71-95-32.cisco.com (dhcp-171-71-95-32.cisco.com [171.71.95.32]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o9BKjqoU004909 for <ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 20:45:52 GMT
Message-ID: <4CB37780.9000509@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 13:45:52 -0700
From: Jim Fenton <fenton@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100915 Thunderbird/3.1.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
References: <20101011193024.2DAE93A6B62@core3.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <20101011193024.2DAE93A6B62@core3.amsl.com>
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [127.0.0.1]); Mon, 11 Oct 2010 14:29:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Greylist: Delayed for 00:42:55 by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.70]); Mon, 11 Oct 2010 14:29:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dkim-implementation-report-03.txt
X-BeenThere: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DKIM Discussion List <ietf-dkim.mipassoc.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim>, <mailto:ietf-dkim-request@mipassoc.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-dkim-request@mipassoc.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim>, <mailto:ietf-dkim-request@mipassoc.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org
Errors-To: ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org

  The same question on Working Group Last Call applies here as well.

Abort, retry or ignore?  :-)

-Jim

On 10/11/10 12:30 PM, Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Domain Keys Identified Mail Working Group of the IETF.
>
>
> 	Title           : RFC4871 Implementation Report
> 	Author(s)       : M. Kucherawy
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-dkim-implementation-report-03.txt
> 	Pages           : 17
> 	Date            : 2010-10-11
>
> This document contains an implementation report for the IESG covering
> DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) in support of the advancement of
> that specification along the Standards Track.
>
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dkim-implementation-report-03.txt
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>
> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
> Internet-Draft.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html