Arvel,
It would help to have some engineering rationale and market demand commentary
to flesh our a call for "utter" rejection.
d/
Arvel Hathcock wrote:
All text that causes SSP to be applied to an already-signed
message needs to be removed.
-1. That simply has to be utterly rejected.
A DKIM signature is a statement of responsibility. When a signature
is present, an organization has taken responsibility for the message.
That's fine for DKIM-Base. We're discussing SSP though.
Arvel
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html