----- Original Message ----- From: "John L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The more I think about x=, the less I understand what it means. > I think what we have here is a fairly fundamental disconnect about > the meaning of a DKIM signature. These questions arose in the > context of x= but they all remain an issue if you take out x= and > replace it with "maximim message transit time". What's wrong with using the Message Reception Time? as proposed in: http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2006q2/003134.html This addresses all time-shifted DKIM expiration scenarios. Lets remember modern mail operations needs to work and be designed around two fundamental platforms: o Dynamic, Online, Interactive, o Offline, Store and Forward, a Time-Shifted emulation of Interactive Operations. The protocol for this expiration concept has to apply to both equally, otherwise you can run into fuzzy inconsistent operations and sure enough, new legal issues as well, as you duly pointed out. -- Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc. http://www.santronics.com _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
