If there is going to be a SSP renaming consideration, may I suggest
"Profile" instead of Practice?
Sender Signing Profile
Probably the acronym should change too, maybe:
DSP DOMAIN (or DKIM) Signature Profile
MSP Message Signature Profile
DMSP DKIM Message Signing Profile
This keeps the door open to exposing more information about the SIGNER and
not just SENDER.
I like Profile because that is more accurate to what a vendor might help
prepare for operators when setting up DKIM. He is setting up a DKIM Message
Signing Profile.
--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hector Santos" <hsantos(_at_)santronics(_dot_)com>
Jim Fenton introduced the signing policy/practices proposal and issues;
after the base document, we'll be attacking this in earnest. The name
is still in flux, with some thinking that "policy" is not the right
term, others thinking that "practices" isn't either. We were pointed to
some work called DDDS that's been introduced in the speermint working
group, which might help us with the work (not with the naming), so
we'll have a look at that.
Practice?
I would hope that everyone practices a safe DKIM Sender Signing Policy!
:-)
Labeling it as a "Sender Signing Practice" doesn't sound right.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html