Just trying to "connect the dots."
SM wrote:
Hi Hector,
At 11:18 01-04-2011, Hector Santos wrote:
Off hand, and I have to go back, I believe seeing some systems using
Authetication-Results to always include a i= as part of its A-R header
result whether it was defined or not and when not, a default value is
displayed. For example, this is the A-R result for my signature into
this IETF-DKIM list:
Authentication-Results: sbh17.songbird.com;
dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.i=@isdg.net
[snip]
Does that mean, a proposal to remove i= in DKIM-BASE, would imply an
update to the A-R draft is necessary?
RFC 5451 is a proposed standard. It is not a product of the DKIM WG.
It's up to the author of that RFC to see whether an update is necessary.
Regards,
-sm
--
Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html