Just on this point:
Do you think that that label would have obvious and useful meaning to
an average administrator who is trying to configure DKIM modules? I
don't. I'm not even sure it's "really what is being described here"
because the label is sufficiently far from language used in DKIM
discussions. Note that I'm not saying your assessment of meaning is
wrong, but that it isn't obvious to me that it is right. For an
acronym, that ought to count against using it.
I like a choice that isn't even close to any of the other terms. That
way they're easily separable. I fear it's inevitable that Identifier
has to be in there somewhere, or I'd get rid of that too. But as UA
really has taken up cognitive space, it alone is worth shooting. Again,
if you don't like the term I picked, that's okay. I really ought to not
have presented one.
What I meant was simply this: the value of i=, or r= for that matter, is
meant to be private or opaque. My problem was that I really REALLY
really wanted to avoid OID ;-)
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to