Michael Thomas wrote:
Dave Crocker wrote:
Do envision a reasonable scenario where a receiver has adopted SSP and
conforms to it, but does not have the stated sender enforcement ...
Yes, trivially. Look at the way Spamassassin works...
SSP_STRICT_FAIL = 4
SSP_ALL_FAIL = 2
SSP_UNKNOWN = 0
That's the problem with a vague spec. I didn't mean to ask for a description
of how this might be done, but a discussion of the likelihood it would.
To use your example, where 5 declares spam, why is the configuration likely to
set STRICT to 4 rather than 10 or 100, given the semantics of Strict?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html