On Wed, 13 Jul 2005, Jim Fenton wrote:
1. The suggestion that the DKIM-Signature be treated as a trace header field
needs to be a suggestion because it's hard to retroactively rule a
previously-unknown header field is a trace header field.
The way I view this kind of normative text is that it can only apply to
implementations that support the current specification, i.e. it implicitly
does not retroactively add new requirements that old implementations
cannot satisfy. Therefore in this case it is sensible to use "MUST".
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch <dot(_at_)dotat(_dot_)at> http://dotat.at/
BISCAY: WEST 5 OR 6 BECOMING VARIABLE 3 OR 4. SHOWERS AT FIRST. MODERATE OR
GOOD.