John R. Levine wrote: >> It does not mean low value mail and I don't think you will find a >> sending mplementing dkim=discardable that would agree with you. > > Then in the RFC we utterly failed to make it clear what dkim=discardable > means. Sigh.
You wrote it! > Once again, we see that ADSP is so broken By design > that even people who like it don't understand what it is for. We don't like it. We liked SSP. But SSP was taken from us and we ended up with a terrible intentionally design morph to stop policy with little to no regard to how it integrates with the rest of the world, namely list system. You could only tell people to ignore it or move it to experimental. No, POLICY isn't the problem - ADSP is! Hey, you wrote it - FIX IT! -- 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
