On Jun 8, 2009, at 3:37 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
The use of the DKIM l=, z= and x= features provide a means for
recipients to separately evaluate DKIM signatures without reliance
on intermediary assessors. In addition, the A-R header does not
capture the IP address when assessing path registration protocols,
which means that safe recipient reassessment might only be possible
in the case of DKIM or reverse DNS.
[...]
Could we please not re-re-re-rehash these A-R issues on ietf-dkim?
This was in response Charles making the statement:
"For such forensic investigations, removing useful information (aka
"dumbing down") is always a dumb thing."
These headers represent an active and potentially hazardous component
used in email annotation. Unless the border MTA is willing to assert
the A-R headers not removed are safe, the A-R headers should be
removed. The point of "rehashing" information excluded from the A-R
header was to emphasize the point that these headers were not intended
to play a role in forensics. Otherwise, the source of a message would
have been important.
-Doug
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html