To my mind, the spec currently stands mid-way, it sort-of protects
obvious headers but cannot possibly protect all, so my druthers is
that we actually remove all compulsion as to which headers are signed
as it may well look truly quaint in five years time when other
important originator headers get created.
If we take the view that -base should be limited to mechanism, and that it
defers "policy" issues to separate specification, as well as operational
preferences that develop over time, then this makes quite a bit of sense.
Given the discussion during today's working group meeting, I think we should
seriously consider taking Mark's suggestion seriously.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html