Some more bug fixes in -03: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chuang-dkim2-sender-policy/03/
-Wei On Sun, Sep 20, 2026 at 4:44 PM Wei Chuang <[email protected]> wrote: > I've updated the document to -02: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chuang-dkim2-sender-policy/02/ > > This strips out mention of support for policy lookup or alignment > requirements at i=n. This also strips out mention of From header field > rewriting. Various subsection headers have been clarified. > -Wei > > On Sun, Sep 20, 2026 at 1:22 PM Wei Chuang <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, Sep 20, 2026 at 8:24 AM Richard Clayton <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >It's possible I'm overreading the relationship >>> >between draft-ietf-dkim-dkim2-spec and this proposal, and if fact what >>> you >>> >are proposing is to support i=1. If so, as Pietro points out, >>> evaluating >>> >DMARC at i=1 can simplify this proposal. >>> >>> I am in favour of the "enhanced-for-DKIM2 DMARC" and relevant MUAs using >>> the i=1 value of the RFC5322 header field. >>> >>> But whatever we decide, the notion that every hop rewrites the RFC5322 >>> - From header field is nonsense. Your draft says that. If you think my >>> - -spec document says that then please cite the paragraph and will ensure >>> that the text is modified appropriately >>> >>> >> My document says this, and I'm stripping that text out. >> -Wei >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
