Dave Crocker wrote:
Michael Thomas wrote:
Whereas SSP began as a simple idea as a means of deciding whether an
unsigned message should have been signed, it has morphed into an
effort to validate the From field. That is a very, very different goal.
This is revisionist history. I've pointed to both of the historical
documents of IIM and DK which directly contradict you.
Evidently you missed the massive number of discussions both in the
working group and elsewhere that agreed that SSP was about unsigned
messages. And, just for the heck of it, note that you missed the
"error" about this in the DKIM Overview draft that has been circulating
for quite a few months.
You specifically said "began". That is completely historically
inaccurate going back many, many years. In fact from the very
beginning.
Given how little serious discussion has taken place in this working
group, and how little effort there has been to summarize discussions, it
is not surprising that you are quite convinced that you know exactly
what the right perspective is. You haven't been pressed to consider that
the views you prefer are seriously challenged.
You made a categorical statement that the goals have "morphed". This
is completely false, and will remain false regardless of how many times
you repeat it.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html