On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Frank Ellermann wrote:
Tony Finch wrote:
Isn't the i= tag the new identity that Keith is asking for?
Checking the draft, i= is optional, must be below d=, it's not
required to match anything selected by h=, and it's a "verifier
policy issue" [XREF TBD] with the fine print.
It's optional but it has a default value. The fact that it may be distinct
from the standard email identities listed in h= is exactly my point: it's
a new "signer" identity which seems to be what Keith was 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