--On 14 October 2009 10:51:10 -0700 Dave CROCKER <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> You're trying very hard to infer something that was not stated or >> implied in either what Dave said above or in the specs themselves. >> >> In general, people are trying very hard to infer something from DKIM >> signatures and from ADSP that simply can't be safely inferred from the >> protocols as they have been defined so far. > ... >> >> Some constructive work would be really helpful here rather than all this >> fist-pounding > > > All of which begs the basic question of why this thread is being pursued? > The questions and answers aren't new. > > d/ I'll guess that it's because the conversation helps its participants to understand the issues. If I've come across as fist-pounding, or repetitive, then I apologise. I do, however, have a better understanding of the issues than when I started, and I hope that others do, too. -- Ian Eiloart IT Services, University of Sussex 01273-873148 x3148 For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/ _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
