Dave CROCKER wrote: > DKIM's main purpose is assessment by reputation filtering engines.
Is this locked in stone as the only utilization of DKIM now and into the future? Is POLICY (an "official" WG work product where reputation concepts are not), no longer included as part of a possible purpose for DKIM? Lets suppose tomorrow I add DKIM signature support, and I use your statement above to document the purpose for DKIM, what do I tell my customer base regarding the "batteries required" (reputation filtering engines) they need to get? Who, what and where are these engines? Where do you buy or get these batteries? IMO, it is these statements that continues to raise confusion and raise the barrier of industry wide adoption that includes the general population of MTA developers and operators from tiny to small to even large. It would be really sweet if we can finally get some consistency Dave, for all parties across the board. -- Hector Santos, CTO http://www.santronics.com http://santronics.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
