No, that is not quite right. The single domain name is the mandatory
_part_ of the payload, but the payload (as passed to the Assessor) may,
and most likely will, include further information (the contents of the h=
field, for example), which a smart assessor may be able to use, especially
in special circumstances it wots of.
But, as I have already pointed out, it is not IETF policy to delve, more
than superficially, into the details of exactly what is communicated
between the various related agents that are fed off an MTA.
Right, exactly so on the last sentence. My concern was only to make
sure that the text made it clear that it's not trying to limit
anything. Beyond that, I don't think we should be listing
implementation details that are beyond the scope of what DKIM actually
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to