John Levine wrote: > You're both right. The open issue in ADSP at this point is whether to > overload i= to attempt to add per-address reputation, or strip out the > cruft so it really does say this domain signs all mail.
wouldn't that mean defining ADSP in terms of d=, rather than i=? it would also remove the confusion about granularity. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
