ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft minutes...

2006-07-13 04:30:58
--On July 13, 2006 2:44:56 AM +0000 Mark Delany <MarkD+dkim(_at_)yahoo-inc(_dot_)com> wrote:

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.

I have to admit that I disagree with the argument but do agree with the conclusion. I don't think it's likely that after 29 years (since the publication of RFC 733) that we are suddenly going to want new originator headers in five years that will make the previous history look quaint. It would take far more than five years to update the MUAs. However, in the spirit of "mechanism, not policy" I think it's a good idea to pull out the normative language (perhaps retain it in yet another informative note).

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