> To my mind, the spec currently stands mid-way, it sort-of protects > obvious headers but cannot possibly protect all, so my druthers is > that we actually remove all compulsion as to which headers are signed > as it may well look truly quaint in five years time when other > important originator headers get created.
If we take the view that -base should be limited to mechanism, and that it defers "policy" issues to separate specification, as well as operational preferences that develop over time, then this makes quite a bit of sense. Given the discussion during today's working group meeting, I think we should seriously consider taking Mark's suggestion seriously. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
