On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
>> Will the release include the interoperability matrix, which I can assume
>> has both to do with "X signing headers in a way Y can understand, as
>> well as Y signing in a way X can understand, plus both to Z, etc etc"?
>
> I would predict the answer to that to be "no" as it would reveal whose
> products were (as of yesterday) "better" than whose, which is kind of the
> opposite of the goal of the event; it wasn't a competition, it was meant
> to foster correct operation industry-wide.

You used (admittedly, in quotes) the word "better", not I.  I don't think 
DKIM correctness is going to be the end-all of choice of MTA, but you also 
DID say "almost", and I think that while your goals to allow EVERYONE to 
be on the same field is great; At the same time, I think it's fair game to 
know that if I'm adopting DKIM as one of my filtering strategies, whose 
products (as of at least which version) I'm not going to be able to 
sign-to (or recognize).

Just a thought.

-Dan

--

"I hate Windows"

-Tigerwolf, Anthrocon 2004

--------Dan Mahoney--------
Techie,  Sysadmin,  WebGeek
Gushi on efnet/undernet IRC
ICQ: 13735144   AIM: LarpGM
Site:  http://www.gushi.org
---------------------------


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
dkim-milter-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dkim-milter-discuss

Reply via email to