I was having this discussion with someone off-list but...
Where I live, I am serviced by only one ISP. I get a discount by having my
services (business, home, cell, internet, etc) bundled by this one provider
and they sign all my messages. Choosing another provider etc. may not
be financially agreeable. I also know that there are spammers or bots on
this provider that take enjoyment out of using my name. So I want to say-
Trust my signature but expressly distrust my providers signature if not
also signed by me. Both messages, mine and the spammers are genuine and
unchanged, signed by my provider, but only my signed messages are valid.
I see this as a feature.
Regards,
Damon Sauer
On 8/1/06, Michael Thomas <mike(_at_)mtcc(_dot_)com> wrote:
Stephen Farrell wrote:
>
> I guess, if agreed, that'd suggest a potential non-requirement for SSP,
> "no need to specify who's not supposed to sign".
+1, and added.
Mike
_______________________________________________
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