[ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Do we need SSP record for DKIM=unknown?

[Frank Ellermann]

Jim Fenton wrote:

> The SSP extension to key records would never be sufficient;
> stand-alone SSP records would need to be published as well.
> I'd like to suggest that we concentrate on the "basic" SSP
> concept for now and keep optimizations such as this for
> discussion later.

+1  It's kind of obvious that for *some* receivers and *some*
mails it might help to offer an "SSP-accelerator" in SPF, as
proposed by Scott (in 2006 IIRC).   No issue for this WG. ;-)

 Frank