2. Does RFC 4871 contain any claims that a DKIM
signature carries a
claim by the signer that any of the body or header content is
"correct" or
"truthful"?
I ask because I believe it does not carry any such
claim and that,
rather, a DKIM signature asserts a very generic degree of signer
"responsibility" which does not extend to formal claims of
correctness.
I agree. RFC 4871 does not contain claims that a DKIM signature implies
content is "truthful".
Your intent is unclear from your question: if we are both right, is this
a good thing? Or do we need to modify RFC 4871?
pat
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html