Hi, SM. Thanks for your comments. In reply to the stuff Barry hasn't already covered: > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of SM > Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 12:35 PM > To: ietf@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-kucherawy-dkim-atps-11.txt> (DKIM Authorized Third-Party Signers) to Experimental RFC > > In Section 3: > > "An Author participates in this protocol if it wishes to announce that > a message from it (in the RFC5322.From sense) should be considered > authentic as long as it bears a signature from any in a set of > specified domains." > > It's the domain and not the author which participates in this protocol. > As a nit, the RFC 5598 term looks more like Originator instead of > Author. The term is more based on how DKIM and ADSP use it. But you're right in that Author Domain is the more correct term rather than Author. I'll change that for -12. > The Abstract section uses the term "authorization" whereas "authentic" > is used in the above text. Shouldn't that be "considered as > authorized"? Yes, I think that's more correct as well. -MSK _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf