This looks pretty good! One major stumbling block, though.
At 4:44 PM +0100 4/19/06, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Proposed:
. . .
Verifiers SHOULD support checking of x= values.
From RFC 2119, which DKIM normative references:
3. SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
. . .
Imperatives of the type defined in this memo must be used with care
and sparingly. In particular, they MUST only be used where it is
actually required for interoperation or to limit behavior which has
potential for causing harm (e.g., limiting retransmisssions) For
example, they must not be used to try to impose a particular method
on implementors where the method is not required for
interoperability.
What is the interoperability or harm-limiting purpose of verifiers
checking x= values? If there is none, the sentence above needs to be
a MAY.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html