> -----Original Message----- > From: MH Michael Hammer (5304) [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 1:46 PM > To: Murray S. Kucherawy; Franck Martin > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Removal of AUID (i= tag/value) > > > > But creating a sub-domain, means that the from needs to match too, > > > > Why? That's an ADSP thing, not a DKIM thing. > > I think his goal is to have it be a 1st party signature (From and d= > match) even absent an ADSP assertion. I'm not sure I agree that this is > just "an ADSP thing, not a DKIM thing". We don't publish ADSP yet I have > had receivers tell me that our doing this is useful to them.
In that case, it's neither. DKIM doesn't make a binding between "d=" and anything else in the message (except "i=", sort-of). Anyone that tries to make a distinction between first party and not first party is doing something outside the scope of DKIM. A message stream, in the context of DKIM, should be evaluated based on the "d=" value, and nothing else. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
