Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] >> On Behalf Of Hector Santos >> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 2:34 PM >> To: Barry Leiba >> Cc: DKIM List >> Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists >> >> After all, that was the original purpose of this MLM I-D effort when >> many people had express concerns with the MLM/DKIM conflicts and lack >> of respect for ADSP and me showing real examples for the >> interoperability problem - it was only then that gave life to this >> document. > > That is not in fact the purpose of the MLM I-D effort. Its > focus, instead, was to discuss how DKIM signatures have > survivability issues when transiting MLMs, and how ADSP can > impact MLM operation, and how MLMs might be encouraged to play > nicer in a DKIM world.
Isn't that just generality stated? Geez! > And it does all of those things. Then the background statement as it written is wrong. > The discussions about identities in a message were > actually largely removed because they can't be substantiated. Based on what you BELIEVE can't be substantiated on a ROUGH consensus basis only which does not remove the substantiated claims, years of proof of concept and the fact the APIs support it since day one, implementations such as support it, including major corporations like Microsoft support it! So it is patently false that it can't be substantiated. -- 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
