ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?

2006-02-22 12:51:17
Hi Douglas,
At 09:52 22-02-2006, Douglas Otis wrote:
While the signing-domain can take effective actions, please attempt
to list the actions the email-address domain owner may take?

I said that the domain owner may take any action deemed necessary. :) The owner is responsible for the signing policy and may wish to determine the impact of the policy.

Consider the effect of only having report vectors referenced from the
email-address domain, rather than the signing-domain who is able to
take effective action to correct a full range of problems that might
be reported.  Report references from the email-address domain

This discussion seems to be about "Should we have an r= tag in either the
signature or key record"

A report vector acquired from the signing-domain would concern _only_
messages they have signed, and not messages that happen to contain an
email-address within their domain.  For domains where use of their

Are you talking about reporting DKIM signatures that cannot be verified? If so, I don't see how you can trust the report vector acquired from the signing-domain.

Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html