Jeff Macdonald wrote:
Is that agent authorized to work "on behalf of" the author?
Seems so:
<http://www.bartleby.com/64/C003/0169.html>
I guess I wasn't clear. A Bad Actor can decide to be an agent to work
"on behalf" any other. It doesn't mean he was authorized to do so.
And being authorized doesn't make them a Good Actor...
Further, DNS delegation takes care of the authorization question, since it
subsumes the actor explicitly and directly under the name (and reputation) of
the delegator. No additional (sub-)mechanism is needed in another specification
to accomplish this. The DNS-based approach is therefore simpler and
well-established.
Whatever the claims about DNS administrative effort, they cannot be better for a
new mechanism that has no history and requires the same level of maintenance.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html