Steve Atkins wrote: > On Sep 1, 2010, at 2:49 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> Lets say we set aside ADSP, as you suggest, and just consider > reputation evaluation. Do you believe there are any people > who'd not find that that level of authentication tunneling > entirely adequate for their needs? But ADSP is in scope of the charter work, and Reputation work is out of scope. Unfortunately, we allowed this type of external reputation working mindset to alter, twist and turn the DKIM WG drafts creating confusion and consensus chaos making it hard to completing the chartered goals. Accept POLICY as a WG work item and maybe we can come to complete this work and maybe many more systems can begin to get more DKIM/ADSP adoption. -- Hector Santos, CTO http://www.santronics.com http://santronics.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html