It appears that Douglas Foster <dougfoster.emailstanda...@gmail.com> said: >-=-=-=-=-=- > >Murray raised the issue of a signature which produces PASS, but lacks trust >because it is constructed with weak coverage, such as omitting the Subject >or including an L=valuie clause.
No, that was me, and the point of such a signature would have been to use it in conjunction with a conventional signature as a way to deal with mailing list modifications. If you read the draft that should have been quite clear. This has nothing to do with anything that "lacks trust". Nobody has implemented that proposal (they did ARC instead) and I cannot imagine any value to discussing it further here. R's, John _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
