Michael Thomas wrote:
Tony Hansen wrote:
add RFC2822.Sender
I'm not the chair, but I've seen considerably less consensus about
anything other
than rfc2822.from. I'm frankly not sure I understand it very well.
I know I don't understand it!
Maybe a more detailed use-case would help? (Tony?)
There's of course
nothing that prevents a receiver from checking SSP for any
address/domain it wants
to, but do we now have a mandate to make assertions about any kind of
origination
address? How do those assertions interact with each other? What does a
strong practice
for ListID and a weak practice for Sender mean if they're in the same
message?
All good questions. And maybe not too easy to be confident in
any answers at this stage?
Finally, is this something that can wait? Ie, are we harmed if we don't
do it now?
Again, I dunno. I believe we do have consensus that at least
rfc2822.From needs to be handled now. If more folks want
rfc2822.Sender to be handled now as well, then they should
say so I guess.
S.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html