On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 06:44:34PM -0400, John L allegedly wrote: > >I cannot see how SSP can do anything but make false positives more > >likely. The real question is whether the gain in eliminating harmful > >mail is worth the occassional false positive.
I guess I'm a little confused about the false policy concern. If a signer wants to take that risk, isn't that for them to decide? Also, if the usual strategy of a verifier is to bounce (or be encouraged to bounce) the offending email, a "I sign all" sender will almost always know about delivery failures of originally signed traffic and be able to act accordingly. Mark. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
