Note: ADSP is incompatible with valid DKIM usage in which a
signer
uses "i=" with values that are not the same as addresses in
mail
headers. In that case, a possible workaround could be to add a
second DKIM signature a "d=" value that matches the Author
Address, but no "i=".
I'll start by proposing text that we could use if we adopted an
alternate definition of Author Signature based on the d= value only.
Then I'll describe what I think we'll lose by going to that
definition.
Given that i= is an arbitrary value assigned by the signer, the
question to me is what value does it add beyond what signed RFC2822
headers can do just as well. Eg, why not set an rfc2822.Sender Field
and sign that rather than invent i=?
IOW, what is the value-add in inventing yet another identity called
DKIM.i= when we already have rfc2822.From, rfc2822.sender,
rfc2822.resent-from, rfc2822.resent-sender and rfc2821.mailfrom?
Are you suggesting that DKIM.i= should have preference over signed
RFC2822 identifiers?
Mark.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html