Re: [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-fenton-dkim-rep

On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 12:57 PM, J.D. Falk
<jdfalk-lists(_at_)cybernothing(_dot_)org> wrote:
> Suggestion: leave i= opaque, and let's see what operators (on both ends of
> the transaction) do with it.
+1 - leaving i= opaque subject to out of band agreements between
sender and receiver is the way to go.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html