On 2006-04-20 10:51, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
SM wrote:
You could have:
5.1. Legacy MUAs
Implementors of this proposal should be aware that many MUAs are
unlikely to be retrofit to support the new header and its semantics.
As there is keen interest in conveying the results of sender
authentication
tests to legacy MUAs, other interim means of doing so may be
necessary while
this proposal is adopted.
I'm okay with that wording. Tony/others?
Perhaps add another sentence: "Care must be taken, however, to avoid
unnecessarily confusing users by adding entirely new meaning to existing
MUA features."
--
J.D. Falk, Anti-Spam Product Manager
Yahoo! Communications Platform Team
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html