Charles Lindsey wrote:
On Tue, 02 Jan 2007 18:11:06 -0000, Douglas Otis
<dotis(_at_)mail-abuse(_dot_)org>
wrote:
I agree. An unsigned From is a cause for suspicion, but there may
sometimes be valid resons, which the verifier should be allowed to
consider. For example, in EAI the From may get downgraded during transit.
It is not yet clear what would be the best way to get around that problem,
but unnecessarily restrictive "MUST"s are not going to help. "SHOULD"
would have been quite strong enough - no interoperability problem srises.
We are talking about Mail Integrity. It doesn't matter what is the
reason for "middle ware" to make changes blindly and hope we can use
NEAR PERFECT KLUDGES to secured the survivability of the mail integrity.
The only logical solution is an "authorized" resign. Whether that is
practical, thats a different mutated frog that one side doesn't want to
touch.
The problem here is we are trying to make DKIM fit everywhere and it
simply can't.
---
HLS
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html