On October 17, 2005 at 16:22, Jim Fenton wrote:
50% of the ones if counted based on actual use by people. Actually
the situation is such that those for who its not visible header field,
can very often change it to make it visible through some additional
seetting and at the same time they are also the ones that are a lot
less likely to be fooled by forgery in the first place...
The people we're trying to help are the ones who won't can't do that
additional setting to make Sender visible. And I'm not satisfied with
helping 50% of the clients.
This seems to be a bad policy to follow. Just because some MUAs
render fields a certain way should not be a basis for how a standard
should be designed.
--ewh
_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org