On Tue, 18 May 2010, Douglas Otis wrote: > Why would you see "rejectable" as being different from "all" assertions?
Just about everyone thinks EITHER that "rejectable" would be redundant with "all", OR that "except-mlist" would be redundant with "all". But narrowing "all"'s meaning down to two choices is not an agreement. This ambiguity is paralysing deployment - a conservative sender who means "except-mlist" must publish "unknown", and a conservative receiver who sees "all" must read it as "except-mlist" (and thus as "unknown" in most cases due to ignorance of local users' subscriptions.). Rather than try to settle the fight over what "all" means, let's just deprecate it and give each camp their own, *unambiguous* flag. ---- Michael Deutschmann <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
