ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

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

2009-01-26 15:59:17
That's correct.  This is dependant on the receiving system having some 
knowledge that the UAID is meaningful to parties outside the signing 
domain, and is therefore not the default.

John Levine wrote:
Simple answer: If the purpose of the original text was to point out to 
users who the message is really from in cases of suspected forgery, and 
through whatever means the receiving system has decided that the real 
responsible identity is the UAID and not the SDID , it seems to me to 
fit better with the original intention of showing the user who the 
message is really 'from' to point out the UAID.
    

Except that the UAID might or might not be an e-mail address.  The one
on this messgage isn't.

R's,
John
  

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html