On 9/29/2020 10:56 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
Sigh, yes. It has caused this misunderstanding, from the start.
It was imposed on the working group by an IETF Area Director and was
agreed to as an expedient.
But, sigh, no. It does not carry any of the semantic import being
claimed in the current discussion.
I meant to also include:
Section 3.11:
To the extent that a receiver attempts to intuit any structured
semantics for either of the identifiers, this is a heuristic function
that is outside the scope of DKIM's specification and semantics.
Hence, it is relegated to a higher-level service, such as a delivery-
handling filter that integrates a variety of inputs and performs
heuristic analysis of them.
INFORMATIVE DISCUSSION: This document does not require the value
of the SDID or AUID to match an identifier in any other message
header field. This requirement is, instead, an Assessor policy
issue.
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
