Subject: Re: Second Last Call: <draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists-11.txt> (DKIM And Mailing Lists) to BCP

From: "John Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 3 Jun 2011 19:34:12 -0000

This problem with this document is that it does not, in fact, describe
Best Current Practices.

The description of the interaction between DKIM and mailing lists is
pretty good.  But of the advice it offers, only one item is in fact
done in production, signing outgoing mail, and everything else is
hypothetical.  We can have (and have had) arguments about whether it
would be a good idea to do what the rest of the advice says, but the
reality is that nobody knows, since we haven't tried it other than
perhaps in tiny experiments.

I'd suggest changing the category to Informational or perhaps
Experimental, after sending it back to the group and telling us to
distinguish between what's current practice and what isn't.

On the other hand, if it's OK for BCPs to consist of Our Unimplemented
Speculation, I have a variety of BCPs I'd like to send along.

Regards,
John Levine, [email-masked], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly

---

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 14:24:44 -0700

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of John Levine
> Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 12:34 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: Second Last Call: <draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists-11.txt>
> (DKIM And Mailing Lists) to BCP
> 

I think this objection has been noted.  This second last call is just to cover the downref to the [EMAIL-ARCH] reference, since the first LC didn't make explicit note of this.