IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@domain-assurance.org> Mon, 22 January 2007 19:41 UTC

Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H952c-00054n-Rm for ietf-dkim-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 14:41:18 -0500
Received: from sb7.songbird.com ([208.184.79.137]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H952b-0001qh-7P for ietf-dkim-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 14:41:18 -0500
Received: from sb7.songbird.com (sb7.songbird.com [127.0.0.1]) by sb7.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l0MJaEDN007936; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 11:36:16 -0800
Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by sb7.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l0MJa23V007900 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 11:36:02 -0800
Received: from [10.20.30.108] (dsl-63-249-108-169.cruzio.com [63.249.108.169]) (authenticated bits=0) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id l0MJZccJ044865 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 22 Jan 2007 12:35:39 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@domain-assurance.org)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p06240818c1dac2253877@[10.20.30.108]>
In-Reply-To: <op.tmjxqxqs6hl8nm@clerew.man.ac.uk>
References: <2FEAFD49FFEC254C78D51FC3@rieux.local> <45B0D77A.6000500@watson.ibm.com> <op.tmjxqxqs6hl8nm@clerew.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 11:34:44 -0800
To: Charles Lindsey <chl@clerew.man.ac.uk>, DKIM <ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@domain-assurance.org>
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-Songbird: Clean, Clean
Cc:
X-BeenThere: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
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>
Sender: ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org
Errors-To: ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org
X-SongbirdInformation: support@songbird.com for more information
X-Songbird-From: ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 68c8cc8a64a9d0402e43b8eee9fc4199

At 10:50 AM +0000 1/22/07, Charles Lindsey wrote:
>What is not clear is WHY this alternative was chosen (as opposed to 
>letting it result in an empty <body>).

Again: it doesn't matter why A or B was chosen. What is important is 
that we have a spec without interoperability issues.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Domain Assurance Council
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email