On 3 Apr 2025, at 16:56, Michael Thomas wrote:
I'd feel more comfortable if a few changes were made:
1. change i= to be something else that doesn't collide with STD 76
2. change t= back to x=. there doesn't seem to be any difference
beyond a different tag name.
3. Explain the anti-replay mechanism a lot more. I've read through
both documents and still don't get it. It's hard to evaluate if it's
even on the right track.
As simply a matter of WG process: Note that even if we adopt the
document as it is now, the above would equate to me as opening 3 issues
in the issue tracker on the document that the WG would need to resolve
and come to consensus on before the chairs could ever call consensus and
forward the document to the IESG. Almost certainly the first two amount
to simple PRs and, even if number 3 amounts to a real extensive amount
of new or changed text to explain the mechanism, it needn't prevent
adoption of the document. All that said, it's up to the group whether
the document is sufficient for adoption; I just want to make sure that
we don't conflate "needs (even serious) fixing" with "can't be adopted".
pr
--
Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list -- ietf-dkim@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ietf-dkim-le...@ietf.org
