> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Hoffman
> The receiver *could* honor the signature forever, just as > they can with an x= tag. But, in doing so, they would be > going against the semantics of the DKIM signature. I think it is necessary to distinguish between protocol semantics and court room semantics. The x= tage would do nothing to change the significance of the signature in a court of law. People seem to have the idea that putting x= would allow repudiation after the time expired, it does not. I don't see that it has any relevance to protocol semantics unless a mail server starts re-injecting old mail, as occasionally happens. Every so often an old machine is rebooted and starts executing the old mail queue. If a party wants the x= semantic the easiest way to do it is to roll their key distribution points (they can even use the same key).
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
