Indeed, but we still have no idea how that translates into making a
The r= parameter would allow the signer to assist the recipient in
distinguishing between well vetted, and poorly vetted sources.
Only if the recipient has some extra info about what meaning a particular
signer gives to its r= codes, which in general will not be the case. Or
if the recipient does know something extra about the signer, they can make
any private arrangements they want, so there's no need to put anything in
Oh, in that case, I have no interest in r values less than infinity, and I
don't think anyone else should, either. If a signer isn't prepared to take
responsibility for the mail they sign, they have no business signing it.
A signer can be highly responsible and _still_ sign messages from poorly
vetted sources. Otherwise, most email could not be signed.
Hey, please don't change the topic. The point of a DKIM signature is that
the signer is taking responsibility for the mail. I am most emphatically
not intrested in trying to peer inside and analyze the entrails of their
internal processes. That's not what DKIM is about.
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to