On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, Jim Fenton wrote:
Michael Thomas wrote:
But that said, Jim has been toying with the idea that the
_signer_ just includes in the signature the address(es?)
that it wants to take responsibility for.
That should probably be "take responsibility as". So this mailing list
could sign and take responsibility as
<owner-ietf-mailsig(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org>.
META Signatures did exactly that, the "s" tag stands for Signer and can
be either email or domain and is the address of "the party that authorized
creation of the signature."
Thus, it seems plausible that a MASS signer could have it
either way? I personally have been pretty reluctant to pick
one kind of 2822|2821 address as being The address that MASS
gives auth/authz; it seems prudent to me to be flexible so
that if the problem mutates, so can we.
I agree.
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net