On Jan 4, 2007, at 7:34 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Doug,
You are repeating yourself, yet again. As far as I can see all this
was raised by you before and none of it achieved WG consensus.
Feel free to try convince Barry and I otherwise, *off-list*, but
please do not continue to try to reopen closed issues on the list.
I see all this as being covered by issues 1265, 1272 (raised by you
and accepted), 1274, 1285, 1288 and probably others (I got bored in
the issue tracker). I see no WG consensus to
re-open those issues.
My apologies.
Header copies as a "remedy" should be viewed from the aspect of
DKIM's purpose. Header copies to be used as a means to "verify" a
signature increases the distance between "verified" and what a
recipient might "see" (in any manner of seeing). It would be a
mistake to depend upon this mode of operation. The "remedy" can be
found elsewhere if and when that time ever comes.
-Doug
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
