-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Steve Atkins
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2010 10:36 PM
To: IETF DKIM WG
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for new text about multiple header issues
That still expands the API from the DKIM verifier quite a lot - it
requires the verifier to explicitly list which headers are signed, and
which aren't (that the h= field doesn't do that is what we're having
problems with). It would also require that to be pushed all the way
downstream to other pieces of software, perhaps via something similar
to an extended Authentication-Results type of header.
That's not impossible, but seems very complex for the specific problem
we're considering - we just need to communicate "This message violated
5322, specifically in a way that makes us think the sender is trying to
game DKIM" (either by flagging the mail as syntactically invalid and
suspicious at some point in the mail stream, or invalidating the DKIM
signature).
[...]
You seem to have some specific ideas in mind already. Can you propose some
alternate text?
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html