In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Tony Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Resent-From: and Resent-Sender: would be signed only if present in the > header. It's perfectly legit for a forwarding system to add them (and > expected according to the specs), and if that forwarding server then > signs the message, those headers MUST be treated in the same category as > From: and Sender:.
I realize that Eric has proposed dropping these headers, but... RFC2822 directly talks about adding Resent-* headers and forwarding: Note: Reintroducing a message into the transport system and using resent fields is a different operation from "forwarding". "Forwarding" has two meanings: One sense of forwarding is that a mail reading program can be told by a user to forward a copy of a message to another person, making the forwarded message the body of the new message. A forwarded message in this sense does not appear to have come from the original sender, but is an entirely new message from the forwarder of the message. On the other hand, forwarding is also used to mean when a mail transport program gets a message and forwards it on to a different destination for final delivery. Resent header fields are not intended for use with either type of forwarding. Please note the last sentence: the Resent-* headers are not intended for use with forwarding. This isn't a SHOULD NOT or a MUST NOT, but don't see how "the specs" expect Resent-* headers to be added during forwarding. -wayne _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
