Post-Delivery Message Downgrading for Internationalized Email Messages
RFC 6857
Yes
(Barry Leiba)
(Pete Resnick)
No Objection
(Adrian Farrel)
(Brian Haberman)
(Gonzalo Camarillo)
(Martin Stiemerling)
(Ralph Droms)
(Ron Bonica)
(Russ Housley)
(Sean Turner)
(Stewart Bryant)
(Wesley Eddy)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 07 and is now closed.
Barry Leiba Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -07)
Unknown
Pete Resnick Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -07)
Unknown
Adrian Farrel Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Benoît Claise Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(2012-11-12)
Unknown
While the writeup mentions:
Consequently the base IMAP and POP3
documents are no longer dependent on particular downgrading
choices and that two methods presented are, to a considerable
extent, just examples.
I believe that the two methods should be Informational, as opposed to Standards Track.
However, I now see the following sentence, which was essential to me:
While this document specifies a well designed mechanism, it is only
an interim solution while clients are being upgraded
[I-D.ietf-eai-rfc5721bis] [I-D.ietf-eai-5738bis].
So I'll clear my DISCUSS.
Regards, Benoit
Brian Haberman Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Gonzalo Camarillo Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Martin Stiemerling Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Ralph Droms Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Robert Sparks Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2012-09-27 for -07)
Unknown
Consider reinforcing in the security considerations section that the actions described by this document do not include removing any signatures from the original message - discouraging a server implementation from trying to be 'helpful' by removing a signature they know will fail.
Ron Bonica Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Russ Housley Former IESG member
(was Discuss, No Objection)
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Sean Turner Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2012-09-25 for -07)
Unknown
- Should the security considerations here have a MUST or SHOULD statement calling for the server to strip existing Downgraded-* header fields? If not, why not? - Would it be worthwhile having a PDF version of this document that contained examples that show actual non-ASCII characters in appendix A? If so, then pointing to that in the ASCII appendix A would be a good thing too.
Stewart Bryant Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Wesley Eddy Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown