ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Extensions (was RE: Proposal: Removal of AUID (i= tag/value))

2011-04-06 14:50:11
The alternative would be very squirrelly when you think
of the general case of multiple signers in the path.

That's not an unreasonable point, but it depends how important you think 
it is to support inconsistent assertions on the same message.  If you have 
assertions that this is the author's real age, or that is the author's 
real e-mail address, who cares if different signatures can't make 
different assertions?

I like the idea of limiting additions to DKIM to things that are related 
to the signature itself rather than to other aspects of the message. 
Presumably we can have an argument whether "this is the real e-mail 
address of the signer" (not the author) is sufficiently related.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet 
for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>