----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Farrell" <stephen(_dot_)farrell(_at_)cs(_dot_)tcd(_dot_)ie>
To: <ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org>
Folks,
If there are other things Mike should be doing with reqs-01 that
haven't been said on the list, now is probably a good time to
raise them (in a new thread).
I'm taking your off list advice and posting this here:
[Offlist]
Hector wrote:
My only concern about all this is that the process has been hijacked
by those who believe a REPUTATION LAYER is the only solution to be
used with DKIM-BASE. I'm afraid the requirements will be written in a
way to water down any strong SSP consideration. Evidence of that is req
#10 and the provisional considerations that the authors themselves
don't believe in.
Stephen replied:
That is a valid concern. I encourage you to keep defending your
position.
--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html