> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Dave CROCKER > Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 2:17 PM > To: DKIM IETF WG > Subject: [ietf-dkim] Ticket #11 > > > Maybe it can be reworded: > > > > A single domain name that is the mandatory payload output of DKIM and > > that refers to the identity claiming responsibility for the signed > > message introduced into the mail stream. > > +1 > > This nicely removes reference to the act of introducing and, indeed, that act > isn't really what DKIM covers, per se. > > However I suggest adding the usual waffling qualifier: > > claiming (some) responsibility
I think we should drop "signed" from it, since that's what the entire specification is about in the first place. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
