> >I haven't looked at the issue tracker. I've seen messages that were > >posted to the list that were saying much the same things I said at the > >BOFs and before the WG was chartered, and I've read the current > >documents and seen that the issues are not addressed or acknowledged. > > > > > Which is to say that we have a process -- that we've published and > followed -- and you couldn't be bothered to use it. I spent a lot of time trying to get DKIM heading in a useful direction before the WG was chartered - and failed to do so. Based on the DKIM charter, my experience with previous IETF working groups, and my limited exchanges with people on the DKIM mailing list and in the BOFs, I concluded that it was not a good use of my time to try to participate actively in the DKIM discussion or follow the mailing list. That's presumably why I wasn't aware of the tracker. I'm glad you have one, though I don't think it really addresses the need for external review that I've been talking about. Regarding DKIM, my current intention is to write up a detailed review of the current DKIM specs and publish that review as an I-D. Perhaps issues for the tracker can be gleaned from that I-D. Keith _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf