Damon wrote:
As the sender whom signed the message, I want to tell the receiver to
trust mine and ignore (or dislike) the rest. I don't want anyone else to
sign in my place if I am the one signing.
Right?
That's exactly where we started:-) Some people (incl. me) don't
see any benefit in disliking additional signatures. (And of course
there's no point is telling a receiver to trust you:-)
Closest I've come to understanding this is where Hector said he
wanted to place restrictions on the route the message takes (e.g.
in terms of number of hops or signatures or maybe even something
else) which may be reasonable but is arguably not for the DKIM
verifier.
S.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html