Christ. I'd support Steve Atkins when he suggests entirely gutting this spec to remove half the alphabet, retaining just d= and one or two others (i= with caveats, t= I dare say)?
suresh On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 3:44 AM, Dave CROCKER <[email protected]> wrote: > > > [email protected] wrote: >> Been trying to avoid it but .... my understanding was that i=author d=signer >> i=foobar.coxhosted.com d=dkim.signer.coxmail.com and that was how 3rd party >> signing was going to work > > > 1. the spec does not say that i= author. > > 2. a requirement that i=author renders DKIM useless for signing by any agent > in > the sequence other than the author's. This goes entirely against the usage > flexibility that has (always) been a goal of DKIM. > > d/ > -- > > Dave Crocker > Brandenburg InternetWorking > bbiw.net > _______________________________________________ > NOTE WELL: This list operates according to > http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html > -- Suresh Ramasubramanian ([email protected]) _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
