ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: Updating Section 6.5: Recommended Signature Content

2011-04-26 12:05:51
-----Original Message-----
From: Hector Santos [mailto:hsantos(_at_)isdg(_dot_)net]
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 11:26 PM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy
Cc: ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: Updating Section 6.5: Recommended
Signature Content

Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
Common examples of fields with addresses and fields with
textual content related to the body are:

    o  From

-1 with the removal of the original text of:

        o  From (REQUIRED in all signatures)

The 5322.From header is a fundamental binding requirement in DKIM
signatures.

It is redundant to the first sentence in the text of Section 6.4 which already 
says From MUST be signed; there's no reason to repeat it here, especially since 
this section is clearly advisory in nature only, and thus there's no harm in 
removing it.

I'd actually like to add Authentication-Results because an agent
that wishes to claim that observed authentication meta-data should
become part of the message core certainly should sign such a field,
but that's not worth recycling at Proposed and basically RFC5451
already says that anyway.

IMO, you should as it will help with DKIM Mail Integration.  If you
think this current non-standard header is IETF RFC material fit issue,
then is it possible to use a generalized text:

     o Any DKIM related verification results and trace fields

That's not correct; RFC5451 is standards track.

The issue is that adding things to DKIM now will prevent its progress toward 
Draft Standard, which is something we're trying to avoid.  Removing things, on 
the other hand, doesn't introduce any backward compatibility issues, and so 
that's allowed.



_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html