Just to be clear, there's no way to "de-certify" (or something like that) a previously adopted document. We simply will not progress it to the IESG even if someone decides to keep updating it.
Ideally, updates will simply stop and the document will expire and, I think, become invisible in the tracker. -MSK On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 11:50 AM Inveigle.net <cs= [email protected]> wrote: > Echoing the views of Bron, Richard and John, I support the adoption of > this document on the proviso that earlier adopted documents which this > supersedes are withdrawn. > > All technical objections remain. > > Regards, > R. Latimer > > On 10/03/2026 8:32 am, Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker wrote: > > This message starts a dkim WG Call for Adoption of: > > draft-clayton-dkim2-spec-08 > > > > This Working Group Call for Adoption ends on 2026-03-16 > > > > Abstract: > > DomainKeys Identified Mail v2 (DKIM2) permits a person, role, or > > organization that owns a signing domain to document that it has > > handled an email message by associating their domain with the > > message. This is achieved by providing a hash value that has been > > calculated on the current contents of the message and then applying a > > cryptographic signature that covers the hash values and other details > > about the transmission of the message. Verification is performed by > > querying an entry within the signing domain's DNS space to retrieve > > an appropriate public key. As a message is transferred from author > > to recipient systems that alter the body or header fields will > > provide details of their changes and calculate new hash values. > > Further signatures will be added to provide a validatable "chain". > > This permits validators to identify the nature of changes made by > > intermediaries and apply a reputation to the systems that made > > changed. DKIM2 also allows recipients to detect when messages have > > been unexpectedly "replayed" and will ensure that Delivery Status > > Notifications are only sent to entities that were involved in the > > transmission of a message. > > > > Please reply to this message and indicate whether or not you support > adoption > > of this Internet-Draft by the dkim WG. Comments to explain your > preference > > are greatly appreciated. Please reply to all recipients of this message > and > > include this message in your response. > > > > Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual > > Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [2]. > > Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the > provisions > > of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of any. > > Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can > be > > found at [3]. > > > > Thank you. > > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/ > > [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/ > > [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/ > > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-clayton-dkim2-spec/ > > > > There is also an HTMLized version available at: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-clayton-dkim2-spec-08 > > > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > > https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-clayton-dkim2-spec-08 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] > > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
