Just on one portion, here:
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Doug Otis
<doug(_dot_)mtview(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
Some systems handle message attachments separately, and at times may exclude
attachments. Eventually, a practice similar to DKIM should be established
to separately encapsulate attachments. Once such a convention exists,
separating message attachment hashes will better ensure textual portions of
a message can be handled independently from that of message attachments.
Hm.
I should think that the DKIM way to handle the removal of attachments
would be for the agent that remove the attachments to re-sign the
message after it does so.
Barry
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html