ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change

2007-12-04 19:15:37
Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 15:30:27 -0800 Dave Crocker <dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net> 
wrote:

Jim Fenton wrote:
In the absence of a valid DKIM signature on behalf of the "From" address
[RFC2822], the verifier of a message MUST determine whether messages
from a
particular sender are expected to be signed, and what signatures are
acceptable.
What's proving interesting is how completely the implication of this seems
to
have been missed by quite a few participants.

I seem to have missed the discussion where anyone but you is suprised by this. If one is going to distinguish between originator signatures and others, then this requirement pretty obviously follows.

+1, and I had the dubious distinction of having to go through the
thousands of mail messages. I can't imagine that there is anything
new under the sun on this topic.

                Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>