Michael Thomas wrote:
What's wrong with "Fails the SSP X test" for x = all,strict? That is
By way of looking for a single "word", albeit an unfortunately geeky one, how
about Strict-Fail?
I'll again state that I don't understand the seeming aversion to more
than one bit for the outcome of the SSP test. It's like trying to shoehorn
all of SMTP's response codes into 200 ok and 500 fail.
The codes have grown slowly. It's called crawling before walking. Always a
good idea, before walking for the first time.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html