> -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Thomas [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011 11:06 AM > To: Murray S. Kucherawy > Cc: DKIM WG > Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Extensions (was RE: Proposal: Removal of AUID (i= > tag/value)) > > Limiting new additions to the dkim header itself at least > would limit the problem of adding new semantics of a > signature header to exactly the entity doing the signing. > The alternative would be very squirrelly when you think > of the general case of multiple signers in the path.
That's a good perspective. I hadn't considered the idea of multiple independent signers. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
