Re: [spfbis] Call for adoption: draft-kitterman-4408bis

[S Moonesamy <[e-mail]>]

At 17:32 13-06-2012, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>Appendix C probably needs to be updated, especially the bit about 
>the IESG note.

Please leave the current version as it is as there is a call for 
adoption currently.

>Also, when we did DKIM it was suggested that the resolved errata be 
>listed by their numbers.  I don't recall if any of the ones you've 
>got there were tracked as errata on the RFC Editor site or just at 
>openspf.org.  Should they be opened as RFC Editor errata if they 
>were only external?  Are there any external tracking numbers that 
>would be useful to add?  It helps people evaluating the document to 
>have this sort of thing as a sort of checklist to ensure nothing's 
>getting missed.

There is no need to file errata as there is an existing working group 
updating RFC 4408.  There are also existing tickets in the issue 
tracker for the errata and the issues raised during the review 
period.  It will likely be the starting point for the upcoming 
discussions.  The suggestion to list the erratum number also came up 
for work in a different working group.

I would like to discuss the above and other details with Andrew 
Sullivan to see how the work can be planned.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy
SPFBIS WG co-chair