ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [ietf-dkim] A proposal for restructuring SSP

2008-01-27 07:41:30
Yes, which is why I stopped following the mailing list closely until I realized 
that some folks presented Ideas even more harmful to my business model. Jim's 
post that I was responding to did mention 3rd party, negatively, so I was once 
again trying to bring to the attention of everyone that without third party 
signing large ISP's have zero interest in DKIM signing or SSP. 
thanks,
Bill


-----Original Message-----
From: John Levine [mailto:johnl(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com]
Sent: Sat 1/26/2008 9:46 PM
To: ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org; Oxley, Bill (CCI-Atlanta)
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] A proposal for restructuring SSP
 
I will state <LOUDLY> that without the ability to handle 3rd party
signing statements, SSP is useless to me.</LOUDLY>

You know that hasn't been in any of the drafts, don't you?

R's,
John


_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html