On Tue, 18 May 2010, Douglas Otis wrote:
Why would you see "rejectable" as being different from "all" assertions?
Just about everyone thinks EITHER that "rejectable" would be redundant
with "all", OR that "except-mlist" would be redundant with "all". But
narrowing "all"'s meaning down to two choices is not an agreement.
This ambiguity is paralysing deployment - a conservative sender who means
"except-mlist" must publish "unknown", and a conservative receiver who
sees "all" must read it as "except-mlist" (and thus as "unknown" in most
cases due to ignorance of local users' subscriptions.).
Rather than try to settle the fight over what "all" means, let's just
deprecate it and give each camp their own, *unambiguous* flag.
---- Michael Deutschmann <michael(_at_)talamasca(_dot_)ocis(_dot_)net>
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html