At 6:50 PM +0100 4/4/06, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Take some list related header field and two signers - the 1st signer
being the 1st outbound MTA and the 2nd signer being the list s/w (or
some other adjacent signer, whatever).
For some reason the originator doesn't want that list header field to
be signed, so he puts "h=<<list-field>>" even though there's on such
header on the message he signed.
Later the list adds a list-field header field and then adds its
signature (over whatever header fields, doesn't matter).
Now, as I understand it, its guaranteed that the 1st signature will
not verify. The second will, or won't, depending on the usual stuff.
My question was whether or not a reminder about this behaviour
would be useful.
It might be useful somewhere in the document, but not in the
description of p=, given that we ust took out the "I did or did not
verify the earlier signatures" stuff.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html