I thought it was clear enough already, but perhaps not. I have no
objection to adding more non-normative text if it helps people
understand things better. And this looks like good text; thanks!
-Jim
Arvel Hathcock wrote:
Hi all!
I can easily see how the new "handling" tag might be perceived as
backward progress on what's been an important theme for a while: the
notion that SSP should not dictate receiver action. Personally, I
think we've become a bit too sensitive on that front. Regardless,
some text at the start of the handling= section might serve to shorten
the microphone line at the next IETF - yeah right :P
How about this:
handling= Non-compliant message handling request (plain-text;
OPTIONAL).
NON-NORMATIVE EXPLANATION: Sender Signing Practices is not
attempting to control or determine what recipients do with the email
messages they receive. However, Sender Signing Practices is attempting
to provide receivers with information from domain owners about what
their wishes are with respect to messages purportedly sent by them.
With this information in hand it is believed that receivers will be
better equipped to make the decisions that seem best to them while at
the same time allowing senders to offer input into that decision
making process. The "handling" tag is designed to offer input from
senders and is not intended to rigidly control receiver behavior.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html