+1 - ditch this fluff.
I have had some sympathy for this in the past but now I have to ask: Are
we creating "Sender *SIGNING* Practices" or "Sender Practices In
General"? Besides, there are already at least two other ways with more
traction to achieve this particular goal.
Arvel
Stephen Farrell wrote:
issue #1365 calls for eliminating requirement
6.3.2 which says:
" [PROVISIONAL] The Protocol MUST be able to publish a Practice
which is indicative that domain doesn't send mail."
If you want to eliminate that requirement say: +1
If you want to keep that requirement say: -1
Remember: wordsmithing is for later.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html