[ietf-dkim] I send nothing

[Hallam-Baker, Phillip]

That is not true.

I sign everything will still result in messages that have failed sigs due to mailing lists and such.

I send nothing is much more categorical. The data can go straight to the bit bucket

SSP is not very relevant in this case as that spec is not on standards track and DKIM is.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-dkim-bounces at mipassoc.org 
> [mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces at mipassoc.org] On Behalf Of Mark Delany
> Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 11:57 AM
> To: ietf-dkim at mipassoc.org
> Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] The URL to my paper describing the 
> DKIM policy options
> 
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 04:30:15PM +0100, Stephen Farrell 
> allegedly wrote:
> 
> > I've always wondered why dkim is taking on the task of 
> supporting "I 
> > don't send mail" since the statement makes no reference to 
> signatures 
> > at all. Arguably, that's something that should be dealt with by 
> > someone else, who might also think about saying "I only send mail 
> > that's less than 1MB", or, "I only send invoices".
> 
> Especially since one can achieve that same effect by having 
> an SSP that says "I sign" everything and then don't sign any email.
> 
> 
> Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
> 
>