On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 10:17:17 -0800 "Murray S. Kucherawy"
<msk(_at_)sendmail(_dot_)com>
wrote:
The most notable syntactic change involves SPF and Sender-ID, where the
local-part should be omitted from the reported authentication result
since those methods don't specifically evaluate that information.
I'm sorry, I guess I must have zone out and missed this discussion during
last call. This is not correct. Much like DKIM, SPF normally works at the
domain level, but senders can define records that allow different results
based on the localpart of the Mail From.
Does the localpart get reported with DKIM? I think they are roughly
equivalent in this regard.
Scott K
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html