|
Re: r= for instilling good domain-name practices: msg#00583ietf.dkim
> The text for the r= parameter indicated that as the number increases, > the recommended annotation levels made by the signer also increase. Indeed, but we still have no idea how that translates into making a reputation decision. > The assurance being made by the signer has _nothing_ to due with > reputation. This r= parameter relates to annotation recommendations > made by the signing domain for a particular message. Oh, in that case, I have no interest in r values less than infinity, and I don't think anyone else should, either. If a signer isn't prepared to take responsibility for the mail they sign, they have no business signing it. R's, John |
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | Re: r= for instilling good domain-name practices: 00583, Douglas Otis |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: What the verifier can do: 00583, Paul Hoffman |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: r= for instilling good domain-name practicesi: 00583, Douglas Otis |
| Next by Thread: | Re: r= for instilling good domain-name practices: 00583, Douglas Otis |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
| News | FAQ | advertise |