Jeff Macdonald wrote:
In any event, "on behalf of" is key wording that permits more
flexibility than you seem to be acknowledging. Note, for example,
that the agent specified in the Sender field is acting "on behalf of"
the author.
Is that agent authorized to work "on behalf of" the author?
Seems so:
<http://www.bartleby.com/64/C003/0169.html>
Whereas SSP began as a simple idea as a means of deciding whether an
unsigned message should have been signed, it has morphed into an
effort to validate the From field. That is a very, very different goal.
While DKIM has the goal of assigning *any* identity to a message, so
that that identity can be assessed, the current work on SSP is
attempting to instead validate authorship.
DKIM needs to say what part of DKIM asserts a new identity. What is the
output of DKIM? And should that output be treated as opaque.
Yup.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html