> But the SSP client is not the naive user - its a DKIM-verifier. Does
> that change the argument? E.g. in terms of requiring consideration of
> other "identities" or "domains" found in the message? (Just asking.)
If an SSP client could consider other identities/domains found within
the message and that consideration could assist in determining the
authentic/non-authentic question then yes that would be very useful
input for a verifier. I'd be all for it. I hope I understood the
question correctly :)
--
Arvel
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html