On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 11:05 PM, John Levine <[email protected]> wrote:
> This agrees with my understanding, too.  The i= may have to be an
> identity, but nothing says the identity has to be meaningful to anyone
> other than the signer.

In which case either the errata doc or the -bis rfc has to introduce a
"MAY" for i= being an identity instead of tying the two together and
effectively excluding the most common uses to which i= will be put.

srs
-- 
Suresh Ramasubramanian ([email protected])
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

Reply via email to