Michael Thomas wrote:
Dave CROCKER wrote:
On 4/30/2011 9:10 PM, Hector Santos wrote:
So perhaps to help shut down this ambiguity we should add a DKIM
terminology to clearly separate it from AUID.
3.x Originating Domain Identity (ODID)
The ODID is the domain part of the From: address. This identity
MAY be considered as an output communicated to an advanced
Identity Assessor module.
Oh heck, let's just declare that the DKIM Signing module MAY output
anything it wants.
That's what 4871 did. Manifestly it worked just fine. We had a
tremendous number of interoperable implementations. The procrustean
insistence that there be a single "output" has not helped
interoperability one iota.
Its just really odd that the we need to hide the facts in RFC4871bis
but not in RFC5585 (DKIM Architecture) and RFC5863 (DKIM Deployment
Guideline)?
Ok, we got it! We need to isolate the signer domain for some future
market place. I'm saving my pennies for this. Mission Accomplished.
But in the mean time, implementors are not listening. They are looking
at other things especially the "author thing" we must burn into the
signature.
Why is it so hard to document these facts in the new revised manual?
--
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