Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Hector Santos
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 2:34 PM
To: Barry Leiba
Cc: DKIM List
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists
After all, that was the original purpose of this MLM I-D effort when
many people had express concerns with the MLM/DKIM conflicts and lack
of respect for ADSP and me showing real examples for the
interoperability problem - it was only then that gave life to this
document.
That is not in fact the purpose of the MLM I-D effort. Its
focus, instead, was to discuss how DKIM signatures have
survivability issues when transiting MLMs, and how ADSP can
impact MLM operation, and how MLMs might be encouraged to play
nicer in a DKIM world.
Isn't that just generality stated? Geez!
And it does all of those things.
Then the background statement as it written is wrong.
The discussions about identities in a message were
actually largely removed because they can't be substantiated.
Based on what you BELIEVE can't be substantiated on a ROUGH consensus
basis only which does not remove the substantiated claims, years of
proof of concept and the fact the APIs support it since day one,
implementations such as support it, including major corporations like
Microsoft support it!
So it is patently false that it can't be substantiated.
--
Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html