MBOX-Line: From johnl-imap at iecc.com  Sun Mar 15 19:39:57 2015
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: John Levine <johnl-imap@iecc.com>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:54 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] DKIM signatures on this list
In-Reply-To: <4d3ef14f-8f48-498c-8352-2d6f6a9c11a4@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
Message-ID: <20150316023957.32209.qmail@ary.lan>

>I am not a DKIM implementer, and speak as a user. False positives and 
>negatives debase the value of the signatures. I expletive expletive mind 
>that debasement, and I don't see that the spec forbids my opinion.

It looks like we're now at the point where everyone can have his own
opinions, but not his own facts.  There are detailed specs for DKIM,
and it works the way it works.  If you don't find that DKIM, as
defined, is useful to you, that's fine, you don't have to use it.

R's,
John

