The draft is in the repository, it was posted to the DNSEXT list in June. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hallambaker-dkimpolicy-00.txt This option has been raised repeatedly on the DNSEXT list. Annother more general draft was circulated a year earlier. By the way where are the drafts proposing the other options in choices? > -----Original Message----- > From: Harald Alvestrand [mailto:harald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 3:27 AM > To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip; Olaf M. Kolkman > Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: SRV records considered dubious > > > > --On 23. november 2006 08:18 -0800 "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" > <pbaker@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > The draft is incomplete. It does not review all the > technical options. > > These were raised on the DNSEXT list months ago. > > Where's the draft? > > > > If you want there to be consensus on a draft then it has to put all > > the options fairly. > > > > If you want to refer to the draft as an authority you have > to consider > > all the options. > > Where's the draft? (of the options, not of -dns-choices) > > > > > >> I also do not agree that the document should not proceed without > >> addressing the pointer mechanism. The document is not of the type > >> that specifies new solutions, it documents tradeoffs. If > your pointer > >> mechanism would be more than 'mail-ware' (i.e. had > sufficient review > >> and consensus) then it could have been part of the > equation. I think > >> that its to late for that. > > > > How is it going to have review if the editors refuse to consider it? > > > > Where's the draft? > > Something that is not documented even as an internet-draft > cannot be seriously considered in a review of current options > line -choices. > > Harald > > > > > _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf