On 5/22/2010 2:09 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> On 05/21/2010 03:45 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
>> On 5/20/2010 3:36 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>>> Separately, some IESG folks have asked whether we really have the cycles
>>> available for some of our new charter items, in particular:
>>
>> I don't und
On 05/21/2010 03:45 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
>
>
> On 5/20/2010 3:36 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>> Separately, some IESG folks have asked whether we really have
>> the cycles available for some of our new charter items, in
>> particular:
>
> I don't understand their concern.
>
> What do they m
On 10/13/2009 4:30 AM, Ian Eiloart wrote:
> I understand the issue here, but part of the point of DKIM/ADSP is to
> allow automated systems to assign reputation to an email domain or email
> address - a byte string.
Since this is a technical standards body, technical precision is important. So
On 5/17/2010 10:08 PM, John Levine wrote:
>The signature means that this message really truly
> came from the mailing list
Actually, DKIM makes no statement about authorship or even actors in the
handling sequence. It merely says that that verified domain is willing to take
"some" respon
On 5/20/2010 11:42 AM, MH Michael Hammer (5304) wrote:
>> From: John Levine [mailto:jo...@iecc.com]
>> Entirely agreed. As this point the only concrete datum I'm aware of
>> is that ADSP has been observed to break IETF mailing lists. I would
>> want to see a lot more practical as opposed to hy
