ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] draft Errata on RFC 4871

2009-01-26 11:08:59
bah. rephrased .. i need to go produce an errata document for this
email - i drafted it in two or three stages and this slipped through
my proof reading.

" There are of course substantial difference in opinion on their
actual real life use cases"

"What reputation model can reasonably be layered on top of this
authentication, either singly or in various combinations of d= and i=,
some of which may only be completely realized in more fine grained
filtering systems, and to a possibly lesser extent or not at all in
larger and more high volume receiver mail systems, which may choose to
concentrate either solely on d= or i=."

suresh

On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 9:30 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
<ops(_dot_)lists(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
Speaking entirely for myself,  I always thought d= and i= are quite
clear concepts by themselves, on what they denote and what they
authenticate.  There is, of course, substantial difference in opinion
exist on their actual real life use cases, and on what reputation
model can reasonably be layered on top of this authentication (or
combinations of d= and i= some of which may be possible in more based
on these.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html