On Wednesday, February 15, 2012 01:03:43 PM Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > > Scott Kitterman Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 12:57 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [marf] Reorganizing the AS > > > > > I'd endorse adding such language for messages that are authenticated > > > by DKIM or SPF, but I believe that the general statement is still > > > needed for other messages. > > > > I don't think it's possible for this applicability statement to cover > > arbitrary authentication technologies. I think it can only address the > > ones we have. I don't mind if we make the references to the DKIM and > > SPF drafts exemplary, but that doesn't mean arbitrary things will work. > > I prefer this approach as well. Do you have specific text to suggest (or > point me to earlier in this thread)?
>From earlier in the thread: > If you change "..., though the means for doing so are not specified in > this memo." to "as described above." I think that ties it together. The > same text is just above in both, so it works either way. Scott K _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
