Stephen Farrell wrote:
Fair enough. But in this case, there has perhaps been some
confusion as a result of not seeing this difference, so
raising it on the list seems reasonable/useful.
Dealing with confusion is almost always a good thing. However I do not see how
a simple listing of generic "requirements" actually *deals* with the concern.
By contrast, discussion about the implications for SSP strikes as potentially
quite helpful.
The more general point, here, is that requirements that are stated in a more
general form are substantially less useful than ones that make statements that
are concrete and have some obvious or stated relationship to the particulars of
SSP.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html