Per the response to Levine's concern, I'd rather simply have text
that dodges the question of multiple signatures, here. Multiple sigs
are fine, but the figure is trying to look at a more contained topic.
I believe that having the figure explicitly show multiple sigs will,
for example, require showing multiple private/public key pairs, and
probably some sort of iterative behavior to cycle through each key.
I'd rather have it just show one signature and put side text saying
that messages can have multiple signatures, but the way a receiver
interprets multiple valid signatures is beyond the scope of this
document.
R's,
John
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html