On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 05:55:38 +0100, John R. Levine wrote:
>> Assuming this is some other protocol layers problem; to ensure
>> consistency
>> between any possible display and DKIM validation, ...
>
> ... is, for about the hundredth time, not DKIM's job.
>
> Please chant "we have no idea how M
> I think we can be pretty sure that - if there's only one "From:" header - then
> the MUA won't display an unsigned From: header in preference to a signed one.
No, but, for example, we have no idea whether an MUA will show any of
these things, or something else entirely:
> From: Barry Leiba
>
On 24 Jun 2011, at 03:46, Douglas Otis wrote:
> On 6/23/11 2:52 PM, John R. Levine wrote:
>>> Acceptance policies and results for DKIM MUST align with
>>> what is being displayed in the message.
>> I'm pretty sure that we have uniformly agreed not to attempt to do MUA
>> design, so, no, it doesn
On 24 Jun 2011, at 05:55, John R. Levine wrote:
>> Assuming this is some other protocol layers problem; to ensure consistency
>> between any possible display and DKIM validation, ...
>
> ... is, for about the hundredth time, not DKIM's job.
>
> Please chant "we have no idea how MUAs will disp
On 23 Jun 2011, at 20:00, Douglas Otis wrote:
>>
>> This seems like a completely bogus argument to me. You're saying that
>> some domains can't be trusted, therefore none can be trusted. That's
>> a logical fallacy.
>
> Not at all. Acceptance policies and results for DKIM MUST align with
> wha
> Assuming this is some other protocol layers problem; to ensure consistency
> between any possible display and DKIM validation, ...
... is, for about the hundredth time, not DKIM's job.
Please chant "we have no idea how MUAs will display mail" over and over
until you believe it. This include
On 6/23/11 8:34 PM, John R. Levine wrote:
>>> I'm pretty sure that we have uniformly agreed not to attempt to do
>>> MUA design, so, no, it doesn't. We have no idea what is displayed
>>> in the message. We have no idea if the message will ever be
>>> displayed at all.
>> Ian,
>>
>> John is rig
>> I'm pretty sure that we have uniformly agreed not to attempt to do MUA
>> design, so, no, it doesn't. We have no idea what is displayed in the
>> message. We have no idea if the message will ever be displayed at all.
> Ian,
>
> John is right. Most headers are displayed selecting top-down
I
On 6/23/11 2:52 PM, John R. Levine wrote:
>> Acceptance policies and results for DKIM MUST align with
>> what is being displayed in the message.
> I'm pretty sure that we have uniformly agreed not to attempt to do MUA
> design, so, no, it doesn't. We have no idea what is displayed in the
> messa
> Acceptance policies and results for DKIM MUST align with
> what is being displayed in the message.
I'm pretty sure that we have uniformly agreed not to attempt to do MUA
design, so, no, it doesn't. We have no idea what is displayed in the
message. We have no idea if the message will ever be
On 6/23/11 5:16 AM, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>
> On 21 Jun 2011, at 19:47, Douglas Otis wrote:
>> Hi Rolf,
>>
>> The general goal of DKIM was to establish a domain relationship as
>> a trust basis for acceptance. DKIM was also to allow incremental
>> deployment without requiring undefined additional fil
On 21 Jun 2011, at 19:47, Douglas Otis wrote:
> On 6/17/11 1:05 PM, Rolf E. Sonneveld wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> after some off-list conversation with Dave he suggested I might want to
>> send this to the list. I apologize in advance if this message does not
>> apply to you. I also apologize if y
On 6/17/11 1:05 PM, Rolf E. Sonneveld wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> after some off-list conversation with Dave he suggested I might want to
> send this to the list. I apologize in advance if this message does not
> apply to you. I also apologize if you get this message twice, when you
> are subscribed to
mailto:ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>>,
"opendkim-us...@lists.opendkim.org<mailto:opendkim-us...@lists.opendkim.org>"
mailto:opendkim-us...@lists.opendkim.org>>
Subject: [ietf-dkim] DKIM expert group meeting for Dutch 'comply or explain'
list
Dear all,
after some off-list co
Dear all,
after some off-list conversation with Dave he suggested I might want to
send this to the list. I apologize in advance if this message does not
apply to you. I also apologize if you get this message twice, when you
are subscribed to both ietf-dkim and the opendkim list.
The Dutch go
15 matches
Mail list logo
