RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=

Sat, 08 Apr 2006 07:10:33 -0700 


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Douglas Otis
Sent: Fri 4/7/2006 7:56 PM
To: Stephen Farrell
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=
 

On Apr 7, 2006, at 1:53 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:

> So a signature expiry failure doesn't mean message rejection, same  
> as if the signature check failed because the message was mangled.

Policy of the receiving domain is out of scope for what we are doing here.
I may choose to ignore DKIM, reject all unsigned or failed signings or a 
mixture of both. The document should clearly state that
xs=blah
r=bleh
dkim=string
and what each piece means, no more no less.

thanks,
Bill Oxley

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html























					Reply via email to