On Thursday 06 December 2007 12:49, Steve Atkins wrote:
In a well-designed protocol based on DKIM, yes I'd agree that a
validly DKIM signed message should not provoke an SSP query.
But that's not the protocol we have.
I think RFC 5016 shows a lack of understanding of DKIM (or is choosing
not to consider some important features of DKIM), and is
part of the push to try and build a next generation SPF on
an inappropriate base authentication technology.
I think you aren't understanding the purpose of SSP at all.
If any random signature from any domain obviates the SSP, what possible use is
SSP?
Scott K
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html