But if you already have enough data to make a decision about a message's
disposition in that case, you also have enough data to make a decision
about that message's disposition regardless of any SSP policy that
anyone might express.
Right. That's another reason that "strict" is a bad idea, because it
gives senders the unwarranted impression that they control (or even
affect) things that we know they don't.
So the question in this case really comes down to whether the policy we
are discussing (or any particular SSP statement) is useful, or at least
non-harmful, when you are evaluating a message for which your existing
? policies do not provide a completely efficacious decision algorithm.
Right again. That's where I say that statements about things about which
the sender has actual knowledge (e.g., "I sign everything") are far more
likely to be useful than statements about things that they don't.
Regards,
John Levine, johnl(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for
Dummies",
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor
"More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html