Dave CROCKER wrote:
Hmmm. It occurs to me that it might help things to have reports from those
who
are using the header. Who is using and how they are using it could help
establish a referential base when a) considering whether the spec is worthy
of
standardization, and b) considering proposed changes to the specification.
We have a number of plug-ins to our MTA which evaluate arriving messages
using several known message authentication schemes (DKIM, Sender-ID,
SPF, DomainKeys). Those plug-ins instruct the MTAs to add
Authentication-Results: headers to indicate to any downstream agent that
may be interested (MUA, filter, whatever) what the results of those
evaluations were.
Elsewhere in our commercial product line, other programs may make
routing/filtering/filing decisions based on the contents of that header
field.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html