Dave Crocker wrote:
Folks,
Arvel Hathcock wrote:
And I must say that the report returned from your reflector is very
impressive and useful. Puts ours to shame really. Good job!
Hmmm.
Should <http://testing.dkim.org/reflector.html> be updated, to uhhh,
errrr, reflect the current level of the specification that is
supported by the various reflectors?
The dkim.org reflector is relatively current. I think it signs at -5. AFAIK,
-05 of the spec to current hasn't introduced any incompatible changes.
There are a few bug fixes that it could use, but that's about it.
Mike
_______________________________________________
dkim-dev mailing list
dkim-dev(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/dkim-dev