Paul Hoffman wrote:
At 4:23 PM -0700 7/27/06, Jim Fenton wrote:
Paul Hoffman wrote:
At 12:17 PM -0700 7/27/06, Steve Atkins wrote:
On Jul 27, 2006, at 12:08 PM, wayne wrote:
In <p06230903c0eeb486a116(_at_)[10(_dot_)20(_dot_)30(_dot_)182]> Paul
Hoffman
<phoffman(_at_)proper(_dot_)com> writes:
"I sign some mail" doesn't tell the recipient anything useful.
What am I missing?
It says that you should look at email without a signature as being
"acceptable", unlike a "I sign all mail" which without a
signature is
quite questionable.
How does that differ from a sender that doesn't have the
"I sign some mail" flag set?
Yes, exactly.
Might the SSP record that says "I sign some mail", which could have a
long TTL, be more effectively cached by DNS than the (negative) caching
when there's no record?
Both should cache equally, shouldn't they? There are not levels of
caching.
What I meant was that negative caching has a TTL which is the minimum
TTL of the zone (likely to be small), while the SSP record can be given
a long TTL because it's unlikely to change frequently. However, that's
a pretty marginal benefit.
-Jim
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html