>>So here's the main SSP axiom that I think should be self-evident, but 
>>apparently isn't: other than the trivial (but useful) case of I send no 
>>mail, the most that SSP can tell you is that a signature is missing.

>I take it then that you see distinguishing between first party and third 
>party signatures as either being of no value or not being feasible?

I don't see the phrases "first party" or "third party" in there,
either explictly or otherwise.

R's,
John

PS: The SSP fog just keeps getting thicker.

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

Reply via email to