>From https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/dkim/history/
> 2023-02-21 Charter approved, group active
Barry
On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 1:34 PM Dave Crocker wrote:
>
> On 2/5/2025 9:39 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>>
>> > Recall there was a prior WG in 2023 effort to tackle replay that
>> > failed du
On 2/5/2025 11:33 AM, Barry Leiba wrote:
>From https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/dkim/history/
2023-02-21 Charter approved, group active
I hate long lists, and always miss the bottom of them. All those
'deleted milestones' put the approved entry below the bottom of my screen.
d/
--
Dave
On 2/5/2025 10:30 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
Please review it and let me know if I've missed anything.
wfm.
fwiw, a bit clunky, but probably not a big deal:
“Backscatter” can result from unauthorized use of the (envelope)
sender of a message, where bulk failure notifications go to an add
On 2/5/2025 9:39 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> Recall there was a prior WG in 2023 effort to tackle replay that
> failed due to a lack of participation by the community
which working group was that?
This one.
his reference was to 2023. While there were discussions about DKIM
I've uploaded another revision based on discussion since v5.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-dkim/
Please review it and let me know if I've missed anything. The tracker will
let you create a diff from v5.
The IESG will conduct its internal review tomorrow morning, after which it
w
On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 7:41 AM Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 2/4/2025 8:30 PM, Wei Chuang wrote:
> > Recall there was a prior WG in 2023 effort to tackle replay that
> > failed due to a lack of participation by the community
>
> which working group was that?
>
This one.
-MSK
On 2/4/2025 8:30 PM, Wei Chuang wrote:
Recall there was a prior WG in 2023 effort to tackle replay that
failed due to a lack of participation by the community
which working group was that?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
bluesky: @dcrocker.bsky.social
mast: @dcrocker@
