John L wrote:
Oh, OK, then your trusted signer list includes cisco.com.
Not really, unless you consider SSP to be a "trusted signer list".
Oh, wow, are you really planning to reject all mail that fails SSP? I
guess we should have a pool on how long that will last until some VP
blows up because it rejected some piece of real mail she really, really
wanted. I'll bid on two hours.
John, would you please try to read my notes instead of just
playing a parlor game with them. I said that we plan to annotate
the mail if it doesn't verify. We're not idiots, and it's a
disservice to the entire community that you are treating us as
if we were.
Mail from this list won't validate, you know, and I doubt that many
others will, but I know I'm not going to make any headway in that
direction.
Every piece of mail I've sent this morning has validated. Really.
That's because it was all Re: and already had the subject line tag.
It's your lucky day.
Please try to stay within your own experience. You clearly have
no idea what you're talking about here. I've implemented this and have
*way* more experience at where the problem are and are not. You're
quite simply wrong, and it's not helping this working group when you're
spreading clearly false information.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html