Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
>No it doesn't.
Ok. You're right. I see it now.
The problem is that I keep thinking that validating keys that can be
used for signing should flow from the policy. Whereas DKIM has this
idea that if a key exists, it implies a policy. It seems workable on
the surface, but it seems to me that a policy-first solution would be
better.
tom
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
