Frank Ellermann wrote:
william(at)elan.net wrote:
1. It changes the originator entirely to From and now instead
of using Sender header field value (as per RFC2822) to
decide cases of multiple From addresses, the first one in
From header field is used?
That would be a step backwards, with more than one From address
there must be a single Sender address. Not necessarily one of
the From-addresses, it can be even different from the envelope.
That's exactly the problem. Sender isn't visible to the recipient with
many of today's MUAs, and (in the -00 version) any message with multiple
From addresses could obtain a first-party signature from anyone that
also adds a Sender header. That amounted to a hole in the SSP
definition of third-party signature, since the "exclusive" policy
intended to prevent that.
say "header field"
Even the last pocket of resistance (= USEFOR) gave up on this
one, "header field " it is :-|
The intent was to be consistent with the use of "header field"; guess we
must have missed some.
-Jim
_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org