Douglas Otis wrote: > The sender-auth draft provides a mechanism for use when ADSP records > are discovered, the From header field can be captured within an > Authentication-Results header. The purpose of the Authentication- > Results header is to convey to MUAs the results of various message > "authentication" checks. Because the Author-Signature definition > limits what is allowed within a compliant DKIM signature, neither > ADSP, Sender-ID, or SPF can properly be described as providing an > authentication of the From header field, PRA, or the MAILFROM email- > address respectively. The Author-Signature definition prevents a > complaint signature "on-behalf-of" value from indicating a From > header field has not been authenticated. >
I'm afraid I'm missing how the definition of Author-Signature, which is a property of the ADSP specification, alters what SPF or Sender-ID can claim. > In addition, the path registration process of Sender-ID and SPF only > authorize an SMTP client. An authorized SMTP client will not safely > convey an assurance that the corresponding email-address was > authenticated to represent the author or even being a valid use of the > email-address. A consumer of the data presented in this header field would be expected to understand what an SPF "pass" or Sender-ID "pass" actually implies before acting on it. There's text covering that in the draft already as well, in the "Header Position and Interpretation" section. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
