Keith Moore wrote:
>>I think that authors that want to protect their reputations can
arrange for
their messages to have DKIM authorship signatures, and also advertise
(say via
DNS) that their messages will have such signatures. Whether this is
done via
an MUA, or via a special submission server, or whatever, is up to the
author.
You can only do this in the MUA because only the MUA can tell the
difference between a new message and a re-submission. However DKIM is
designed to be deployed in an MTA in the usual case.
I don't think DKIM should preclude MUA signing of authored content.
DKIM doesn't preclude MUA's from doing anything, but I
don't understand what "author" means. It seems that you
have ideas about introducing roles to DKIM which it doesn't
currently have in any explict form. While not dismissing it
out of hand, receivers are generally hard pressed to make
use out of that sort of information since it's so trivial
for the signer to just lie about their role if it gains
them an advantage. And if it requires all kinds of third
party reputation infrastructure to police it... I don't
think we're there yet.
Mike
_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org