[ietf-dkim] How to reconcile passive vs active?
hsantos at santronics.com
Mon Aug 7 06:03:29 PDT 2006
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Farrell" <stephen.farrell at cs.tcd.ie>
> Chair-ish quibble: I think the positions exposed on the list
> must of course be covered in reqs-00, but I also think the
> more words that are used to do that, the more disagreement we'll
> get. Put another way, I hope no-one wants to see a reqs-00
> that has near as many words as have been posted to this list
> over the last couple of weeks.
I'll be happy with just a fascimile of the following block of words:
- Protocol must offer support for the following domain
- no mail ever expected by domain
- no signature expected whatsoever by domain
- domain signature optional, no third party expected
- domain signature optional, 3rd party allowed. See below.
- domain signature required, 3rd party allowed. See below.
- domain signature required, no 3rd party expected
- Protocol must support optional "allow list" of domain allowed
Bonus Block of Words:
- Protocol must offer optional "Highest Hashing Method
Possible" understood by target end point.
Maybe MT can just cut and paste this small block of words in and I think
reached pareto's ratio! <g>
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
More information about the ietf-dkim