On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Frank Ellermann wrote: > Tony Finch wrote: > > > Isn't the i= tag the new identity that Keith is asking for? > > Checking the draft, i= is optional, must be below d=, it's not > required to match anything selected by h=, and it's a "verifier > policy issue" [XREF TBD] with the fine print.
It's optional but it has a default value. The fact that it may be distinct from the standard email identities listed in h= is exactly my point: it's a new "signer" identity which seems to be what Keith was asking for. Tony. -- f.a.n.finch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ BISCAY: WEST 5 OR 6 BECOMING VARIABLE 3 OR 4. SHOWERS AT FIRST. MODERATE OR GOOD. _______________________________________________ ietf-dkim mailing list http://dkim.org
