On 8/29/06, Hallam-Baker, Phillip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The requirement that I believe that the delegation discussion highlights is the
need for controlled delegation.
I.E I delegate to Fred the ability to sign on behalf of [EMAIL PROTECTED] but
not [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+1
Are we going to specifically disallow fred the ability to sign for
[EMAIL PROTECTED] by policy or say that fred can only sign for
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Regards,
Damon Sauer
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
