On 8/4/06, Michael Thomas <mike(_at_)mtcc(_dot_)com> wrote:
What seems abundantly clear is that the unqualified policy "I sign
everthing"
is not useful as is, and is most likely harmful due to differences in
the way
that people interpret what that statement means.
I invite people for the requirements to make *precise* statements of the
fully qualified meaning in their heads about "I sign everything", and
preferably in a sentence or less as that is what the world is going to
actually think of when they deploy this.
Mike
It is my opinion that in its current state "I SIGN ALL" is inferring
an absolute and will most likely be treated by both senders and
receivers as such. Therefore, a failure will likely be treated with
extreme prejudice by the receiver regardless of this groups suggested
usage and will completely undermine the senders expected value of
signing in this manner.
Regards,
Damon Sauer
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html