ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]
<prev [Date] next>
[Advanced]
 <prev [Thread] next>

Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=

2006-04-11 07:41:13
from [Paul Hoffman] [Permanent Link] 
At 6:38 AM -0700 4/11/06, Michael Thomas wrote:

This is a false dilemma because you are requiring dkim to work in
situations that it was explicitly not intended to work for.
If MUAs are not supposed to be validating messages, then we need to change the -base spec in many places. 

Is that what this WG wants?
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
[More with this subject...]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date:  Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, John R Levine
Next by Date:  Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Michael Thomas
Previous by Thread:  Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, John R Levine
Next by Thread:  Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Michael Thomas
Indexes:  [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]