[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-opes-smtp-security-00
- To: OPES Group <ietf-openproxy@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-opes-smtp-security-00
- From: SM <sm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 08:47:11 -0700
- Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1155397655; bh=Q3vduazhIS4pUpjm5VjRZWdENxcZKOPIWcSPcW6KNx8=; h=DomainKey-Signature: Message-Id:X-Mailer:Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=NiZVW5qQCEDhrN1jWZEd7aRXBPruprJMd0eM/i WrF/kOz75PLSb8UocqFrvTKeKZ5YdyQo7Z4soCz8F+I7sbiOKqezOyS9LXgLYw2dzB1 98mPYDxasA5r1kKncHzY4yNUbmlORh/D8r1iQBZM0dcorJ3CoKXGTGye33+tjhU/W4=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=mail; d=resistor.net; c=simple; q=dns; b=YucCe3C1u1PItEeifna/kOGEdr5qpT42AVykj/eRH5EhWNhTP/rTl8up39rI+4Xxj DEIGEPT2/vdRA++VrMWGi8UYJelzIdJ+EguSbF9WVLEi34GnBye2EuIhxJMmI2h+ypt W8WV0wmQSepvk/sZGLnm2KEjotbYVsUuP8wkgWw=
- In-reply-to: <44DDCF2C.1070904@xxxxxxxx>
- List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-openproxy/mail-archive/>
- List-id: <ietf-openproxy.imc.org>
- List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-openproxy-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
- References: <44DDCF2C.1070904@xxxxxxxx>
- Sender: owner-ietf-openproxy@xxxxxxxxxxxx
At 05:53 12-08-2006, Markus Hofmann wrote:
We are starting WG last call on the "Integrity, privacy and security
in OPES for SMTP" draft (see
http://ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-opes-smtp-security-00.txt).
In Section 2.2 "A large number of email filters is deployed at SMTP
gateways today;" should be:
A large number of email filters are deployed at SMTP gateways today;
Section 2.5 mentions "compromised OPES systems". If an OPES system
mangles a message in such a way to make it undeliverable or
unreadable, it doesn't mean that the system has been compromised. I
suggest removing that word.
Section 3.3 has two typos, "Encrpyting" and "Beause".
Regards,
-sm