As much as I fear we are becoming awash in email functional module names, I suspect your suggestion is the only reasonable choice here.
I've come to view this example as "a function that can be placed within any module that is part of a particular Adminstrative Domain (trust domain)." So, signing is expected to be done somewhere inside the Originating ADMD and validation within the Receiving ADMD. d/ Eric Allman wrote: > In reviewing the documents prior to the meeting today, I noticed an > oddity in draft-ietf-dkim-overview-09. The intro to section 5 says > "The MSA signs the message..." and "The MDA verifies the > signature...". However, this isn't necessarily true, and in fact > conflicts with 3.1.2 (Implementation Locality), 5.2 (Signing), 5.3 > (Verifying), and 5.6 (DKIM Placement within an ADMD). > > If those words are intended to be relative to just the DKIM service > then I suggest other wording such as "DKIM Signing Agent (DSA)" and > "DKIM Verification Agent (DVA)". > > eric > _______________________________________________ > NOTE WELL: This list operates according to > http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html > -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
