John L wrote: > That would be fine with me, but what it says now is that the i= MUST match > the From: address. As I've said a few times, that's clearly wrong, but I > got shouted down in the past when I tried to change it.
Without getting into the merits of the argument (and I don't think we should do all that again), the document does currently reflect the WG's rough consensus so let's keep this to adding clarifications as Pasi requested and not try re-open issues now after the end of IETF LC. Stephen. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
