Wonderful!
2 plus years hammering out IETF public standard specs for DKIM and we
now we get proprietary non-standard non-IETF workgroup half baked ideas?
Why didn't you atleast write an IETF draft? and try to get a working
group going? Come on. Waste people's time with this stuff. Who says
this VBR thing works? You? Where is the Threat Analysis and
engineering behind it?
What? Are you know telling receivers?
DKIM SANS VBR --> NO TRUST
DKIM WITH VBR --> TRUST?
Does that give us permission now to DUMP SANS VBR messages?
What makes you think it isn't going get abused in the same way (NO VBR
headers)? Oh, you only care about the GOOD NEEDLE in the haystack?
Whats makes you think its not the same issues related to SSP? This is
the same thing, its just not SSP - but VBR!! Same thing!
---
HLS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Hoffman" <paul(_dot_)hoffman(_at_)domain-assurance(_dot_)org>
To: <ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 8:21 PM
Subject: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and VBR tester available
Greetings again. The Domain Assurance Concil has created a test
server that will send out messages for people to use when testing
their DKIM and VBR message receivers. The system requires a login to
prevent spam or mail-bombing. The messages also include VBR-Info
headers (<http://www.domain-assurance.org/protocol-overview.phtml>)
that will resolve, for those of you wanting to test the VBR protocol.
If you are interested, please contact me directly for an account. The
service is free to anyone, not just DAC members.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Domain Assurance Council
_______________________________________________
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