ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM does not identify senders, and we have big semantic problems

2009-01-29 21:27:48
Christ.  I'd support Steve Atkins when he suggests entirely gutting
this spec to remove half the alphabet, retaining just d= and one or
two others (i= with caveats, t= I dare say)?

suresh

On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 3:44 AM, Dave CROCKER <dcrocker(_at_)bbiw(_dot_)net> 
wrote:


Bill(_dot_)Oxley(_at_)cox(_dot_)com wrote:
Been trying to avoid it but .... my understanding was that i=author d=signer
i=foobar.coxhosted.com d=dkim.signer.coxmail.com and that was how 3rd party
signing was going to work


1. the spec does not say that i= author.

2. a requirement that i=author renders DKIM useless for signing by any agent 
in
the sequence other than the author's.  This goes entirely against the usage
flexibility that has (always) been a goal of DKIM.

d/
--

  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html




-- 
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops(_dot_)lists(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com)
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>