After all of the discussion a few months ago about the need to consider
all of the addresses in the From header field (and not just the first
one, lest we break RFC 2822, etc.) shouldn't we use the plural here?
Also, the second sentence conflicts with the definition of Author
Signature in section 2.7. I suggest the following:
This document specifies an adjunct mechanism to aid in assessing
messages that do not contain a valid DKIM signature corresponding to the
author address(es) in the message.
I would keep the old version of the third sentence, that makes it
clearer that it's domains that are doing the advertising.
Yes, those all seem reasonable to me.
As I hardly need tell you, no matter how long and hard one stares at
a document, there's always editorial problems that escape notice
until someone else looks at it.
R's,
John
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html