On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 07:34:53PM -0500, J D Falk wrote:
>   On 30/12/2008 11:15, "Dave CROCKER" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>   > The fact that i= is defined to identify a user, rather than a mailbox,
>   and
>
>   A user, or a use!  But I doubt that makes things any clearer.

I thought i= was just an identity. It could have any of these
properties:

1) is a valid domain when it is the same as d=
2) could be a sub-domain of d= and might not even exist
3) could look like an address/mailbox (with 1 & 2) but that mailbox
doesn't have to exist
  
So it should be treated opaquely as it could really represent anything. 

-- 
Jeff Macdonald
[email protected]

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

Reply via email to