On 10/3/2013 6:25 PM, Douglas Otis wrote:
On Oct 3, 2013, at 1:37 PM, Barry Leiba wrote:
To both Doug and Hector, and others who want to drift in this direction:
As I've said before, the question of moving ADSP to Historic is one
we're taking on its own, and is not connected to anything we d
On Oct 3, 2013, at 1:37 PM, Barry Leiba wrote:
> To both Doug and Hector, and others who want to drift in this direction:
>
> As I've said before, the question of moving ADSP to Historic is one
> we're taking on its own, and is not connected to anything we do or
> don't do with DMARC. Bringing
Please accept my apology as I do not mean to be disrespectful. I find
it impossible to separate all design considerations that are involved
in this decision you are requesting us to consider regarding a near
7-8 years DKIM + POLICY investment.
DKIM originated with POLICY support built-in and i
To both Doug and Hector, and others who want to drift in this direction:
As I've said before, the question of moving ADSP to Historic is one
we're taking on its own, and is not connected to anything we do or
don't do with DMARC. Bringing DMARC into the discussion is a
distraction, and, worse, mak
On 10/3/2013 1:51 PM, Douglas Otis wrote:
Dear Hector,
Indeed, more should be said about underlying reasons. The reason for abandoning ADSP is
for the same reason few providers reject messages not authorized by SPF records ending in
"-all" (FAIL). Mailing-List software existed long before e
