[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Weird i= in client mail

2013-06-17 22:48:30

On Jun 17, 2013, at 4:09 PM, John Levine <johnl(_at_)taugh(_dot_)com> wrote:

I haven't been able to find anything that discusses the intention behind the 
i=. I expect
they chose this i= because that's the envelope from, but the i= is suppose 
to be a person,
not a mechanical address, correct?

Historical bit: it is my impression that i= was invented by people who
were used to corporate mail systems where user identities are tightly
controlled and all the mail can be traced back to an individual user,
so the i= was that user's mail address.

At one stage i= was thought to represent different mail streams with different 
reputation, however this did not get any traction...
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to