On Mar 26, 2006, at 7:45 PM, Tony Hansen wrote:
One message that I wrote had a table, showing what a couple possible
syntaxes might be for o=
o=-signature,-3ps signature=never,3ps=never
?/WEAK o=~signature,-3ps signature=optional,3ps=never
~/NEUTRAL o=~signature,+3ps signature=optional,3ps=allowed
!/EXCLUSIVE o=+signature,-3ps signature=always,3ps=never
-/STRONG o=+signature,+3ps signature=always,3ps=allowed
./NEVER o=nomail nomail
^/USER o=user checkuser
These tokens are related to use of a From email-address with a DKIM
signature of the same domain. Signature being optional while
disallowing third-party signatures makes little sense. The user
level mode takes a high level of DNS transactions to a higher level
while also exposing email-addresses. If the mode restricts the use
of From email-address to that of a DKIM signature of the same domain,
there should be no need to indicate that no mail is sent.
With the use of specialized labels "*." for "open-ended" and "." for
"only this domain" would allow the following meanings:
First-party signatures should include these domains and others.
_fps._dkim.<from-domain>. PTR this-domain.tld.
PTR that-domain.tld.
PTR *.
First-party signatures should only include this domain.
_fps._dkim.<from-domain>. PTR .
Key Group Tags provides a lower cost solution than a user level
approach, and where annotation conventions could better protect
recipients.
A PTR and Key Group Tag would allow for all these modes and yet
provide better information.
-Doug
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html