Re: [ietf-dkim] Urgent: draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-10 and RFC 5451

[Jim Fenton <[e-mail]>]

Barry Leiba wrote:
> Pasi is putting draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-10 on the 4 June telechat.  But...
>
> This version has added registry entries for RFC 5451
> (Authentication-Results), which had been removed from that document to
> avoid having its publication block on a reference-wait from ADSP.
> Only, I can't find any discussion that the WG had about making that
> change.
>
> While I think this change will not likely fuel any controversy, we
> can't publish this without having it approved by the working group.
> So, ASAP, please:
>
> 1. If someone can find documentation of WG discussion about this, reply here.
>   

To my knowledge, there was no WG discussion about this.  John Levine
pointed out the change to the co-editors of the draft on March 31,
noting that this makes the dependencies between RFC 5451 and ADSP match
the timing of their publication, and that this shouldn't be
controversial.  I agree.

> 2. If anyone objects to its inclusion (see sections 5.3 and 5.4 of
> draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-10), reply here.
>   

Just to be thorough, I'll point out that the new section 6.4 describes a
consideration that largely stems from RFC 5451 as well.

No objection.
> 3. A few "Yes, adding this is groovy," messages would be good and all.
>   

Yes, adding this is groovy indeed.

-Jim

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html