ietf-mailsig
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Suggestion: assigning DKIM o= policy names

2005-07-22 14:21:44

Yeah, I've already started using Hector's terminology when talking to my tech support folks about DKIM.

--
Arvel


----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Fenton" <fenton(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com>
To: "Hector Santos" <hsantos(_at_)santronics(_dot_)com>
Cc: "IETF-MAILSIG" <ietf-mailsig(_at_)imc(_dot_)org>
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: Suggestion: assigning DKIM o= policy names



I like this. I have been using the word "stronger" to describe what you're calling "exclusive", but I can change my habits.

-Jim

Hector Santos wrote:

It is possible to have same english terms assigned the outbound signing
policy tags?

Just ideas:

o=~ NEUTRAL or RELAXED (signature optional [,No 3rd party?])
o=-  STRONG  (signature required, 3rd party allowed)
o=!  EXCLUSIVE (signature required, no 3rd party)
o=.  NEVER  (no mail expected)
o=^  USER

It is easier to converse with someone that a domain has a "relaxed or
neutral DKIM" policy" as opposed to a "o=~ DKIM policy"

--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com









<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>