On Apr 2, 2010, at 2:27 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
Authentication-Results: wmail.tana.it;
dkim=pass header(_dot_)i=(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org;
x-dkim-rep=neutral (-100 from al.dkim-reputation.org)
header.d=mipassoc.org
Many reputation systems can output much more detailed information, and many
work on scales other than 0 to 100 (or -100 to 100.) Even those which do use
numeric values may not attach the same meaning to the same numbers.
* "Report-To" (or "Reportable", or "Abuse-Report-To") as an additional
Authentication-Result method whereby the MTA responsible for receiving
the message conveys that, based on other methods and any additional
knowledge internal to the MTA, that host will accept an ARF for this
message. The syntax may be something like
Authentication-Results: resp-mta.example.com;
report-to: abuse;
to mean <abuse(_at_)resp-mta(_dot_)example(_dot_)com>, which would be assumed
by
default in case resp-mta.example.com is an SMTP host (MX/A/AAAA).
Variations?
This part's definitely overloading Authentication-Results, IMHO.
--
J.D. Falk <jdfalk(_at_)returnpath(_dot_)net>
Return Path Inc
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html