> -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of > Alessandro Vesely > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 2:46 AM > To: ietf@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-kucherawy-authres-header-b > (Authentication-Results Registration For Differentiating Among > Cryptographic Results) to Proposed Standard > > For a minor point, the example (A.1) the I-D makes does not illustrate > the reason for introducing header.b. The exemplified signatures can > already be distinguished by their header.i values. By setting that > attribute also in this case, the example conveys the impression that > header.b should not be omitted, even when it is unnecessary. If that's > the intended meaning, it should be stated more explicitly, IMHO. Thanks, that was an oversight on my part. I'll correct it in the next version. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf