Re: [ietf-dkim] summarizing my understanding of the errata discussion &

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Pasi(_dot_)Eronen(_at_)nokia(_dot_)com
<Pasi(_dot_)Eronen(_at_)nokia(_dot_)com> wrote:
> So, even exact match with some email header is useless to the
> recipient (unless it somehow knows that the Signer is using same
> namespaces for these two fields).
So, entirely opaque to the recipient and solely for the sender's use,
unless decided otherwise (out of band, typically)

This also provides an added layer of security for a reputation model,
I guess - where i= can be a hashed token that is unique + parseable by
a plugin at the recipient ISP and hooks into a reputation system (sort
of what goodmail would do if it plugged into dkim?)

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