On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 14:23:06 -0000, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
<pbaker(_at_)verisign(_dot_)com> wrote:
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Charles Lindsey
I just want to point out that similar arguments also apply to
the "MUST sign the From header" case.
I disagree, I can easily write a test vector for that MUST so it is
emprically verifiable. Hence it can be made a MUST.
True. Perhaps I overstated my case. However, it still conflicts with RFC
2119, since no interoperabilty arises (the sky does not fall in) if you
fail to sign the From. All that happens is that people might suppose it is
not always a good idea (and they m,ay even turn out to be right in some
cases). But you are not supposed to use "MUST" for that. "SHOULD" would be
quite strong enough.
--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131
Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clerew(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html