On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 domainkeys-feedbackbase02(_at_)yahoo(_dot_)com wrote:
--- Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> wrote:
Sender is so widely misused in practice that you really need to define a
new field for this, or better yet, just define a new one that has
cleaner semantics.
So let me get this right. Because the semantics of From:, Sender:,
Resent-From:, Reply-To: 2821.MailFrom, List-ID: overlap, are ill-defined, and
often ill-implemented, your solution is to introduce yet another field that
will magically clear the whole mess up even though all previous attempts in
this direction seem to have failed?
Isn't the i= tag the new identity that Keith is asking for?
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch <dot(_at_)dotat(_dot_)at> http://dotat.at/
BISCAY: WEST 5 OR 6 BECOMING VARIABLE 3 OR 4. SHOWERS AT FIRST. MODERATE OR
GOOD.
_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org