I'm one of the authors of RFC 5617, which this document would update if it moved into the standards track. It doesn't seem very useful to me, but it also seems mostly harmless so there's no reason not to publish it as experimental. This strikes me a hack that appeals primarily to bulk mail senders who grossly overestimate how interested receivers are in helping them do their mail management. So I would be surprised if there were many receiver-side implementations, but it's an experiment so what the heck. > "No actions are required by IANA at this time. The following need > only be applied if and when this specification reaches the Standards > Track." I would strongly suggest changing the IANA section so that the DKIM-Signature tags in section 8.4 are registered when this is published. Tags are text strings, and I'd rather the tags it uses be noted and reserved so that nobody uses them for something else in the future and risks collisions. For the same reason, it'd probably be a good idea to register the authentication-results tags described in sections 8.2 and 8.3. Regards, John Levine, johnl@xxxxxxxx, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf