I'll add a -1 to mandating publishing of MX as well.
Do we have enough votes to put this to bed and move on?
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Jon Callas
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 3:17 PM
To: DKIM List
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: ISSUE 1547: SSP-02: MX Record
publishing mandateto reduce DNS overhead for SSP Discovery and
to detectfraudulent messages
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I'd like to add a big -1 to mandating publishing MX,
conflating DKIM and SMTP and so on.
Jon
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Universal 2.6.3
Charset: US-ASCII
wj8DBQFHs1BPsTedWZOD3gYRAsftAKC6GbS3EfXP+8j1dKpe2o8uSwGYsACgjEfs
SE8mHyOtaH6SvrUKFbxSkJI=
=irVG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html