We seem to have a fairly basic disconnect here. As far as I'm
concerned, an assessor has better things to worry about than the
internal details of the signature. Trying to reverse engineer or guess
what the signer had in mind would be a hopeless swamp even if it were
desirable. ...
If assessors can't be bothered, then how will reputation systems know the
difference?
Sorry, but I have no idea what the antecedent to this question is supposed
to be. The difference between what and what?
Assessors know whether a message is signed, and if it has valid
signature(s), the domain(s) that signed them. All that other stuff in the
signature is implementation details.
R's,
John
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html