-----Original Message-----
From: Hector Santos [mailto:hsantos(_at_)isdg(_dot_)net]
Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2011 1:55 AM
To: SM
Cc: Murray S. Kucherawy; Michael Thomas; ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Output summary - Purported Author
I would like to also note that RFC4871bis has added references to
AuthRes [RFC5451] and with this official inclusion, we began to
support it and that required code changes to the API, but it is not
mandatory if you only stick with reporting the first three outputs
(status, d= and i=).
It's not mandatory at all. It's given as an example mechanism for
communicating results between different pieces of the email architecture.
There is no mandate to do anything specific to support RFC5451 over any other
mechanism.
More importantly, if RFC5451 reference was compliant with DS, I would
suggest adding a reference to RFC5585 DKIM Service Architecture is
more justified and DS compliant and doesn't promote any current
implementation code changes and better prepares future implementations
with the proper DKIM output values.
Referencing RFC5451 as an example doesn't promote any current implementation
code changes.
Providing a reference to RFC5585 may not be a bad idea though, and RFC4686 and
RFC5863 as well. Perhaps somewhere in Section 1?
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html