AR is basically a trace header
It is? Says which requirement?
Section 2.1 of Murray's draft says:
This new header field MUST be added at the top of the message as it
transits MTAs which do authentication checks so some idea of how far
away the checks were done can be inferred. It therefore should be
treated as a Trace Header Field as defined in [MAIL] and thus all of
the related definitions in that document apply.
and section 3.1 says:
As stated in Section 2.1, this header field SHOULD be treated as
though it were a trace header field as defined in section 3.6 of
[MAIL], and hence MUST not be reordered and MUST be prepended to the
message, so that there is generally some indication upon delivery of
where in the chain of handling MTAs the message authentication was
done.
This is approximately the same language as in section 3.5 of RFC 4871
that says to treat DKIM-Signature: as a trace header, too.
If you want to have a theological argument about the difference
between something that's treated as a trace header and something that
actually is a trace header, please have it with someone else.
R's,
John
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html