[ietf-dkim] Reading the entrails, was Moving to consensus

[HLS]

But if one doesn't agree with the specs,  you are not going to get the wide
interoperability endorsement and adoption you presume people will follow.
And I mean, across the board, not the peer group.
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:02 AM, John Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:

> On the other hand, if you're sending mail to people you don't know, or
> you're evaluating mail from people you don't know, it really would be
> a good idea to do what the spec says.  In the particular case of l=, I
> doubt that Steve and I are the only people who think its risk vastly
> outweighs its potential utility, so if you want to maximize the odds
> that recipients will accept your signatures, don't use it.
>
> R's from the Axis of Interoperatbility,
> John
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
>



-- 
hls
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/attachments/20090324/8ff8e821/attachment.html