Hector Santos wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wietse Venema" <wietse(_at_)porcupine(_dot_)org>
The problem that you refer to is due to the mistaken belief that
DKIM signatures imply anything about rfc2822.from addresses.
You keep saying that its a mistaken belief. Yet, DKIM-BASE is filled with
sorts of implications about the x822.From address. See section 5.4.
I'd have to agree with Wietse's interpretation here. Anything you
infer about the rfc2822.from is something you're doing after (or
in parallel with, whatever) DKIM-base processing.
And I don't accept that this means there are batteries missing
or any other negative analogy.
And I further believe that the position as stated by Wietse
does represent the consensus of the WG, so I don't think we
should continue to argue the merits or otherwise of various
possibilities for DKIM-base signature semantics.
S.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html